smartphones – Macleans.cahttp://www.macleans.ca
Canada's national weekly current affairs magazineSat, 10 Dec 2016 00:57:47 +0000en-UShourly1https://wordpress.org/?v=4.4.2Parental phone monitoring apps flourish in South Koreahttp://www.macleans.ca/society/technology/parental-phone-monitoring-apps-flourish-in-south-korea/
http://www.macleans.ca/society/technology/parental-phone-monitoring-apps-flourish-in-south-korea/#respondFri, 15 May 2015 09:23:07 +0000http://www.macleans.ca/?p=719439Last month, the country passed a new rule requiring telecom companies and parents to install the app on new phones for children

]]>SEOUL, Korea, Republic Of – Lee Chang-june can be miles from his 12-year-old son but still know when he plays a smartphone game. With the press of an app he can see his son’s phone activity, disable apps or totally shut down the smartphone.

The app, “Smart Sheriff,” was funded by the South Korean government primarily to block access to pornography and other offensive content online. But its features go well beyond that.

Smart Sheriff and at least 14 other apps allow parents to monitor how long their kids use their smartphones, how many times they use apps and which websites they visit. Some send a child’s location data to parents and issue an alert when a child searches keywords such as “suicide,” ”pregnancy” and ”bully” or receives messages with those words.

In South Korea, the apps have been downloaded at least 480,000 times.

The number will likely go up. Last month, South Korea’s Korea Communications Commission, which has sweeping powers covering the telecommunications industry, required telecoms companies and parents to ensure Smart Sheriff or one of the other monitoring apps is installed when anyone aged 18 years or under gets a new smartphone. The measure doesn’t apply to old smartphones but most schools sent out letters to parents encouraging them to install the software anyway.

Many countries have safety filtering tools for the Internet but it is rare to enforce them by law. Japan enacted a law in 2009 but unlike South Korea it allows parents to opt out.

South Korea’s new system is by no means impervious. For one, it can only be fully applied to Android phones not Apple Inc. phones. But cybersecurity experts and Internet advocacy groups argue the monitoring infringes too far on privacy and free speech. Some warn it will produce a generation inured to intrusive surveillance.

“It is the same as installing a surveillance camera in teenagers’ smartphones,” said Kim Kha Yeun, a general counsel at Open Net Korea, a non-profit organization that is appealing the regulator’s ordinance to South Korea’s constitutional Court. “We are going to raise people who are accustomed to surveillance.”

South Korea, one of the Asia’s richest nations, is crisscrossed by cheap fast Internet and smartphone use is ubiquitous. Many Koreans get their first smartphone when they are young. Eight out of 10 South Koreans aged 18 and below own a smartphone, according to government data. Some 72 per cent of elementary school students owned a smartphone in 2013, a jump from 20 per cent in 2011.

How technology is affecting the young has become a national obsession. The government and parent groups have pushed numerous initiatives to limit device and Internet use as well as prevent excessive gaming. Many parents welcome the ability to peer inside their children’s online world.

Lee, who worked in the online game industry for nearly a decade, said that having a control over his son’s smartphone has been positive and increased dialogue in the family. His son plays a mobile game about two hours on weekends. If he wants to play a mobile game outside those hours, he comes up to dad and talks about why.

“What is important is that parents and children talk to each other and try to build consensus. He is only in a sixth grade but he wants to have his privacy,” Lee said. “I told him: We are installing this and father will know which app you use,” he said. “I see it as positive in helping nurture his habit of self-control.”

Legal experts, however, say South Korea’s telecoms regulator has taken the sweeping step of legalizing the broad collection of personal, sensitive data that belongs to teenagers without any public consultation or consideration of the possible consequences.

“South Korea underestimated the chilling effect,” said Kang Jeong-Soo, director at Institute for the Digital Society.

Cyber security experts also warn that the apps could be misused and installed on phones without the owner’s knowledge.

“It could be an official spying app,” said Ryu Jong-myeong, CEO at SoTIS, a cyber security company.

To get around the regulations, some students say they will wait until they turn 19 to get a new phone.

“I’d rather not buy a phone,” said Paik Hyunsuk, 17. “It’s violation of students’ privacy and oppressing freedom.”

Cho Jaehyun, a senior year high school student, had to install a parental control app when he was in middle school. But he said he was lucky that his parents agreed to uninstall the app when he entered high school.

“We don’t always use the smartphone for something bad,” said Cho, 17. “Because I could use my phone freely without control, I got interested in developing iPhone games.”

Not all parents are on board either.

Park Choel-hee, father of a 10-year-old daughter, said South Korea resorts too much to regulation and makes “senseless” choices about what content is offensive.

“A few officials arbitrarily determine which websites are harmful and unilaterally shut them off. They rob the rights of Internet users. It is no different from the Great Fire Wall of China.”

Park, who gave his daughter his second phone so she didn’t have to release her personal information to mobile carriers, said he feels “uncomfortable” that his child is growing up in a society of prying eyes.

]]>PYONGYANG, Korea, Democratic People’s Republic Of – Online shopping has arrived in North Korea, though it’s as isolated from the rest of the world as the country itself, and the vast majority of North Koreans lack the technology to use it.

The website Okryu, aimed primarily at smartphone users, offers products from North Korean companies including women’s clothing, bags, shoes, medicines, cosmetics, furniture and food. Payment, in local currency only, is taken from the main North Korean debit card system.

To keep it all hermetically sealed, the site works not on the World Wide Web but on North Korea’s own intranet, a self-contained version of the Internet set up and maintained strictly for domestic use. North Koreans call it the “domestic web” and it’s been around for years, but not used very much, largely because very few North Koreans have personal-use computers that can go online at all.

Smartphone use, however, is growing, and Okryu’s presence suggests that the government does not consider the technology to be a threat to the country’s rigid social order.

While cellphones are still largely absent from the countryside, it has become common to see people using them while walking down the streets of the capital. After years in which it limited mobile phones to elites or banned them entirely, North Korea began allowing their broad use in 2008. By 2013, the number of mobile and smartphones mushroomed to about 2 million, or nearly one for every 10 North Koreans.

Last year, North Korea’s mobile phone network, Koryolink, started allowing customers to use their phones to look at a very limited number of local websites – such as the ruling party newspaper, the state news agency, a TV show download site, a local university site and a science and technology site called “Hot Wind.”

Okryu (pronounced ong-yu) is managed by the General Bureau of Public Service, a government organization that oversees shops, restaurants and producers of consumer goods. Bureau official Jong Sol Hwa recently confirmed the online shopping site, announced with much pride by state media last month, is up and running.

It’s impossible to say how popular the new site is or if the average North Korean shopper is even aware of it. The site’s managers haven’t announced statistics about page views, unique users or sales volume.

During a demonstration for an AP Television News crew, a bureau official clicked on the site for the Kumsong Food Factory in Pyongyang and scrolled down to a pack of cream buns, which brought up a new page with that item and its price – 78 North Korean won (less than 1 U.S. dollar, depending on which exchange rate is applied), which is in line with prices at stores in Pyongyang.

The next step is to type in how many packs the user wants and tap the buy button. After hitting confirm, the purchase is finished.

How were the goods delivered? And when? Those questions weren’t answered in the demonstration, though they are critical to the website’s success. Foreigners – whether they are inside or outside North Korea – are barred from using the service.

North Korean shoppers may find it particularly useful that the site lists similar items together so they can compare prices. That is a luxury here because advertising is nearly non-existent and travelling to do bargain-hunting can be difficult. Evidently, the socialist country is content to inject some competition into its virtual world.

]]>http://www.macleans.ca/economy/north-korea-unveils-online-shopping-site/feed/0Is a better rechargeable battery finally in the works?http://www.macleans.ca/society/technology/is-a-better-rechargeable-battery-finally-in-the-works/
http://www.macleans.ca/society/technology/is-a-better-rechargeable-battery-finally-in-the-works/#commentsMon, 03 Nov 2014 21:29:43 +0000http://www.macleans.ca/?p=634293A better battery would be sweet relief for smartphone users. But there's another industry that might benefit even more from it.

The pace of innovation in the consumer electronics industry is so rapid that a three-year-old iPhone 4 might as well be some sort of prehistoric tool. But the same can’t easily be said of the batteries that run our frantic, increasingly mobile world. In fact, by some estimates, today’s rechargeable batteries are only about eight times more powerful than the first ones invented back in 1859.

So when researchers from MIT claim to have devised a new type of lithium battery with double the energy capacity, it’s potentially a very big deal. A recent article in the Financial Times (subscription required) suggests scientists have found a novel way to incorporate lithium in the cell’s anode instead of relying on silicon or graphite, as is the case in most of the lithium-ion cells now in production. That’s significant, since lithium is among the most reactive elements in the periodic table, which essentially functions as the list of ingredients that battery-makers have to work with.

The breakthrough, if it pans out, could pave the way for smartphones and tablets that can hold their charge twice as long, or be made smaller and thinner without compromising battery life. Moreover, batteries made with lithium in the anode are said to be cheaper to produce, since they are more temperature-stable and, therefore, require less additional engineering to keep them from overheating.

Perhaps the biggest impact would be on the electric-vehicle industry. Despite the buzz around companies such as Tesla Motors, electric vehicles still account for a tiny percentage of auto sales, with the vehicles’ limited range and relatively high cost (the battery packs account for about a third of the sticker price) believed to be among the key reasons consumers continue to flock to traditional gasoline-powered cars and trucks. Back in June, Tesla founder and CEO Elon Musk even agreed to share the car company’s various patents with competitors as part of an effort to spur widespread adoption of electric cars. Tesla is also investing heavily in battery manufacturing in an effort to bring down costs.

A twofold improvement in battery performance—as modest as that might initially sound—could ultimately prove to be the catalyst Musk and others in the nascent electric-vehicle industry have been searching for.

The first cellphone prototype, the Motorola DynaTAC, was the approximate size and shape of a loaf of Calabrese bread. By today’s standards, it was a behemoth, but at the time (1973), it looked like a sleek, seductive portent of the future. That moment is where this book begins. Woyke, a veteran technology reporter who has covered the field for both Forbes and Businessweek, aims to trace a history of advanced mobile phones that arcs from that original Motorola brick all the way to Edward Snowden’s NSA revelations, and beyond.

She’s achieved that goal, though The Smartphone feels a bit like two separate, interconnected books. The ﬁrst is a meticulously reported account of the development of the industry on a nuts-and-bolts—or microchips and LCD—level, from the initial dominance of Scandinavian carriers like Nokia and Ericsson through the eventual triumph of Apple and Samsung. She pinpoints the smallest ripples of technological development—the intellectual-property skirmish over the pull-down “windowshade” effect on homescreens, for example, gets special mention.

In the second section, Woyke delves into larger, more nebulous ideas, from radiation-related fears and the role of smartphones in aiding health outreach in the developing world, to the very timely topic of personal privacy. Woyke is at her best when exploring these broader cultural issues, and urgent matters such as the tension around using conflict materials like tungsten and tin—both are known to be controlled by militarized groups in the Democratic Republic of Congo—or the very real concerns around labour practices in the Chinese factories that manufacture smartphone parts. She touches on the infamous Foxconn complex, best known as the subject of Mike Daisey’s factually inaccurate This American Life monologue about Apple, and just one of many plants plagued by worker suicides. Here, Woyke matches her diligent reporting skills with vivid, nuanced language that animates the stories she’s telling.

It’s a shame that energy doesn’t infuse the book’s ﬁrst half. At times, she seems so consumed by industry machinations that she loses sight of the cultural context surrounding smartphones. Even a few kicky anecdotes would help—more on Steve Jobs’s notoriously fastidious personality and process, for example, or an account of how RIM’s Jim Balsillie tried to freeze out the Globe and Mail after some less-than-ﬂattering coverage. Still, The Smartphone is a smart, comprehensive read, and a fascinating deconstruction of the elegant, feature-packed devices people of 2014 simply can’t imagine living without.

]]>http://www.macleans.ca/culture/books/smartphones-dissected/feed/0Is BlackBerry back in black?http://www.macleans.ca/economy/back-in-black/
http://www.macleans.ca/economy/back-in-black/#respondThu, 19 Jun 2014 17:21:56 +0000http://www.macleans.ca/?p=571393A quick look at BlackBerry's financial statement confirms the tale of a company trying to shrink its way to profitability

]]>All but left for dead, smartphone pioneer BlackBerry has punched an emaciated fist through the dirt covering its supposed gravesite. The Waterloo, Ont.-based company surprised just about everyone Thursday by reporting a much smaller than expected $60-million loss in its fiscal first quarter. When various one-time items were added in, including an adjustment to the valuation of its convertible debentures, Blackberry even managed to squeeze out a $23-million profit—at least on paper.

Investors reacted quickly. BlackBerry’s shares soared 12 per cent to $10.09 on the Toronto Stock Exchange shortly after the results were released. Analysts, meanwhile, said the unexpectedly strong performance suggests BlackBerry’s battered business, decimated by competition from Apple’s iPhone and devices running Google’s Android software, may have finally been stabilized.

The company isn’t out of the woods yet, of course. But new CEO John Chen claims he can finally see some light filtering through the trees. “Over the past six months, we have focused on improving efficiency in all aspects of our operations to drive cost reductions and margin improvement,” he said in a statement. “Looking forward, we are focusing on our growth plan to enable our return to profitability.”

So far, the recipe for getting BlackBerry back on track has included massive cost-cutting—selling real estate in Waterloo, slashing jobs and outsourcing the production of new BlackBerry models. The BlackBerry Z3, a low-cost touchscreen model released in Indonesia this year, was designed and manufactured by Taiwan’s Foxconn, which also makes Apple devices. Chen also unveiled a new, keyboard-equipped phone with a larger, 4.5-inch screen called at the company’s annual general meeting today in Waterloo. It’s called the Passport and will be officially launched in September.

At the same time, Chen plans to refocus the company on selling more profitable software and services, ranging from its popular BlackBerry Messenger client to new services that connect a growing number of machines to the Internet and each other. That’s key because BlackBerry’s once-dominant share of the smartphone market is expected to fall below one per cent globally this year, according to a recent forecast by IDC. “The only way the company will be viable is likely through a niche approach based on its security assets,” IDC’s analysts said.

A quick look at BlackBerry’s financial statement confirms the tale of a company trying to shrink its way to profitability. In the three months that ended on June 1 of last year, BlackBerry racked up more than $3 billion in revenue (and posted an $84-million loss in the process). The sales figure for the same period in 2014? Just $966 million.

]]>http://www.macleans.ca/economy/back-in-black/feed/0BlackBerry back on death watchhttp://www.macleans.ca/economy/business/blackberry-back-on-death-watch/
http://www.macleans.ca/economy/business/blackberry-back-on-death-watch/#respondMon, 04 Nov 2013 23:12:46 +0000http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=437814BlackBerry’s “death spiral” appears set to resume. The troubled maker of smartphones has ditched plans to go private in a tentative deal that would have seen Prem Watsa’s Fairfax Financial…

]]>BlackBerry’s “death spiral” appears set to resume. The troubled maker of smartphones has ditched plans to go private in a tentative deal that would have seen Prem Watsa’s Fairfax Financial and other investors pay $9 a share for the company—ostensibly providing a floor for the flagging stock. Instead, BlackBerry plans to raise $1 billion in cash through the sale of debt instruments that can later be converted into equity if BlackBerry’s shares return to the $10 mark. Investors weren’t thrilled with the deal, which threatens to dilute their holdings. They bailed out of the stock Monday, pushing it down 16 per cent to just $6.50.

Most analysts view the transaction as little more than a Plan B after Fairfax failed to find additional investors to fund its $4.7 billion privatization bid before a self-imposed deadline. That’s despite weeks of rumours of potential interest from everyone from co-founders Mike Lazaridis and Douglas Fregin to Facebook—suggesting few, if any, see much potential value in the one-time smartphone pioneer.

Under the new arrangement, Fairfax will by up to $250 million of the convertible debentures, which pay six per cent interest. If BlackBerry’s turnaround is a success Fairfax could add considerably to its current 10 per cent stake in the company. If it fails, it will be among the first in line during any bankruptcy given its new status as a debt holder.

While $1 billion in new capital is nothing to sneeze at, all it really does is buy BlackBerry a few more months to execute a turnaround plan that so far hasn’t worked. BlackBerry’s longtime supporters continue to flee the email-centric devices in favour of the iPhone and phones running Google’s Android software. Yet, in spite of its dwindling market share, BlackBerry opted last year to stay the course and continue development of its long-delayed BB10 operating system in the hopes of clawing its way back into the race. CEO Thorsten Heins cut costs and delivered the first BB10 device earlier this year, but he failed to whip up consumer enthusiasm for the flagging BlackBerry brand.

Now the tough job of digging BlackBerry out of an increasingly deep hole—the company burned through $500 million in cash during its most recent quarter—falls to incoming interim CEO John Chen, who will replace Heins in about two weeks once the debt sale is completed. While Chen has already put to rest rumours that he’s there to break up the company and sell it off in pieces, it’s far from clear how he plans to resurrect the business. “BlackBerry is an iconic brand with enormous potential—but it’s going to take time, discipline and tough decisions to reclaim our success,” Chen said in a statement.

Chen has faced challenging circumstances before. He was named CEO of a troubled enterprise software firm called Sybase in 1998 and returned it to profitability, ultimately selling the business to SAP for nearly $6 billion twelve years later.

At BlackBerry, Chen will have roughly six months—probably less—to pull off a similar feat.

Is there such thing as a mercy takeover? Fairfax Financial and an unnamed group of investors are proposing to buy BlackBerry for $9 a share, or about US$4.7 billion, in a deal that one analyst has described as a “take-under.” The plan, according to Fairfax CEO Prem Watsa, is to refocus BlackBerry on its corporate roots without the pressure of quarterly earnings targets. “We can deliver immediate value to shareholders, while we continue the execution of a long-term strategy in a private company with a focus on delivering superior and secure enterprise solutions to BlackBerry customers around the world,” Watsa said in a statement.

Watsa, who holds about 10 per cent of BlackBerry’s stock, stepped down from BlackBerry’s board last month when it was announced the company was redoubling efforts to find a buyer for all or part of its business. It’s unclear whether co-founder and former co-CEO Mike Lazaridis is also involved with the buyout proposal. Previous reports suggested that Lazaridis, who held about six per cent of BlackBerry’s stock as of earlier this year, had been talking to private equity partners about a similar going private transaction.

At the moment, all of the buyout consortium’s members are financial players, according to Watsa. However, he told the Globe the group could welcome a strategic investor into the fold if the opportunity presented itself. The terms of the deal also give BlackBerry the right to shop itself around to other potential buyers for six weeks, although several analysts have expressed doubt that another bidder will emerge.

Shareholders are no doubt relieved that the carnage in RIM’s shares has been halted. They dumped the stock last week after BlackBerry revealed it would take a write-down of nearly $900 million in the second quarter thanks to a growing inventory of unsold phones (shares opened Monday morning at $8.47). BlackBerry also announced plans to cut as many as 4,500 employees, or about 40 per cent of its workforce, in an effort to stay afloat. It’s a long fall from grace for a company that once dominated the global smartphone market, employed more than 20,000 and boasted a share price as high as $150.

For BlackBerry fans, the future continues to be murky. The company’s new BB10 devices, though impressive from a technological standpoint, have failed to excite consumers. And it’s no longer clear that BlackBerry’s once iron-clad grip on the corporate market can be counted on to revive the company’s fortunes. Where once employees begged their bosses to equip them with a status-bestowing BlackBerry, these days most employees, from the mailroom right up to the CEO’s corner office, demand permission to send and receive work emails on their iPhone or Android-powered device, forcing corporate IT managers to fall in line. Turning back the tide will be extraordinarily difficult for BlackBerry, privately held or not.

The decision by BlackBerry’s board of directors to strike a special committee to explore “strategic alternatives” for the company, including a possible sale, should come as relatively little surprise. Fourteen months ago, the company then known as Research In Motion Ltd. revealed it had hired two investment banks, including J.P. Morgan (who is still advising the company), to undertake a similar strategic review. However, analysts said at the time that a buyer was unlikely to emerge until BlackBerry’s much-delayed next-generation operating system, BB10, had been successfully launched and the company’s prospects had stabilized.

Only one of those two conditions has so far been met. The new BB10 phones hit store shelves earlier this year with several novel features. They include an OS that allows users to move seamlessly between applications and software that improves the experience of typing on a touchscreen. BlackBerry has also touted the technical underpinnings of BB10 since it’s built on a software platform previously used in automobiles and other industrial applications. But none of it has done much to excite consumers. The company’s once-dominant share of the smartphone market continues to slide amid stiff competition from likes of Apple and Samsung. Recent numbers from research firm IDC showed BlackBerry’s OS with a mere 2.9 per cent of the market, less than the 3.7 per cent share now enjoyed by Windows-powered devices. Apple, meanwhile, has a 13.2 per cent share of the global market, while devices running Google’s Android system boast a nearly 80 per cent share.

The question, then, is who would be willing to buy BlackBerry now? The company reportedly explored the idea of going private last year with the help of private equity firm Silver Lake Partners, but was unable to agree on a valuation of the company. More recently, Reuters reported that BlackBerry CEO Thorsten Heins and the board were warming up to the idea of a going-private transaction, which would give BlackBerry more freedom to retool its business model without pressure from analysts and investors.

It’s also possible RIM could be scooped up by a rival software or hardware company. Microsoft has long been rumoured to be a potential buyer, although it now seems committed to its partnership with Nokia. Earlier this year, the market was also speculating on interest from Chinese computer-maker Lenovo, but no deal emerged. Other suitors could include Samsung or Amazon. However, the track record for strategic purchases of struggling smartphone makers has left something to be desired. Hewlett-Packard’s purchase of Palm for $1.2 billion three years ago went nowhere, while Google’s purchase of Motorola for $12. 5 billion in 2011 has yet to yield any significant consumer breakthroughs.

Another key question is whether Ottawa would attempt to block a purchase of BlackBerry by a foreign company, as it did with BHP Billiton’s proposed $39 billion takeover of Potash Corp. three years ago. Once the cornerstone of Canada’s tech sector, the BlackBerry brand has fallen so far out of favour with consumers (and voters) that it’s difficult to imagine Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservative government taking a stand on any transaction. Plus, it would be extraordinarily difficult for the federal government to explain why it’s reportedly wooing Verizon Communications north of the border, in a bid to increase competition in the wireless sector, but is against the idea of allowing a foreign company to buy a maker of smartphones to run on those same networks. However, the calculation could be made more difficult by the fact that BlackBerry, even in its diminished state, still runs a lot of key communications infrastructure for governments and big corporations around the world.

The future of BlackBerry, it seems, now depends on the board’s newly-minted special committee finding a suitor with incredible vision and an outsized appetite for risk. If it fails, the chances are greatly increased that BlackBerry will eventually go the way of Nortel Networks — broken up and sold off in pieces.

]]>http://www.macleans.ca/economy/business/blackberry-back-on-the-block/feed/12Smartphone ownership way up: Google studyhttp://www.macleans.ca/news/smartphone-ownership-way-up-google-study/
http://www.macleans.ca/news/smartphone-ownership-way-up-google-study/#commentsMon, 29 Jul 2013 12:52:27 +0000http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=409248TORONTO – Not only is smartphone ownership way up in Canada, users are getting increasingly addicted to their mobile devices, suggests a new report released by Google.
Based on online…

]]>TORONTO – Not only is smartphone ownership way up in Canada, users are getting increasingly addicted to their mobile devices, suggests a new report released by Google.

Based on online surveys with 1,000 Canadians earlier this year, the report estimates that 56 per cent of adults were using a smartphone, up from 33 per cent in early 2012.

About eight in 10 smartphone owners said they don’t leave home without their mobile device. And two-thirds of them said they had used their phone every day in the past week.

About 35 per cent said they’d become so reliant on mobile connectivity that they’d give up TV before having to part with their smartphone.

“Mobile has become a core part of how people live their lives today,” said Google Canada’s head of mobile advertising Eric Morris.

“The study shows people are using mobile to change all aspects of their life, whether it’s their job, travel, shopping, the way they communicate with others, and specifically trying to understand the world around them.”

About 78 per cent of the smartphone users said they connected to social media with their device and 52 per cent said they logged on daily.

Morris said he was struck by the number of users who reported they were watching video on their phone. About 75 per cent said they had streamed video on their small screen and almost one in five said they did it daily.

“People watch videos on the biggest screen they have available to them,” said Morris.

“Sometimes that’s your 50-inch TV at home, sometimes that’s your tablet while you’re on the couch or in bed, and sometimes that’s the smartphone while you’re on the couch or travelling or even in the office.

“I think one of the interesting things from this survey is there is a lot of mobile consumption that’s being done in the home…on home WiFi.”

Other stats revealed in the report:

The average smartphone user had 30 apps installed on their device and had used an average of 12 in the past month. They had paid for an average of eight apps.

Just over one in four smartphone users had made an online purchase with their device. Of those users, about half had made a purchase in the past month and the same number said they shopped on their phone at least once a month.

About 77 per cent said they had searched for a product or business on their phone, and 27 per cent said they changed their mind about a purchase in a store after completing a mobile search.

]]>http://www.macleans.ca/news/smartphone-ownership-way-up-google-study/feed/1Why you should be worried about the security of your Android phonehttp://www.macleans.ca/general/why-you-should-be-worried-about-the-security-of-your-android-phone/
http://www.macleans.ca/general/why-you-should-be-worried-about-the-security-of-your-android-phone/#respondThu, 04 Jul 2013 15:34:22 +0000http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=402019Security flaw in 99 per cent of devices

A San Francisco tech security firm is raising concerns about the security of all Android smartphones manufactured since 2009.

A flaw was discovered by a research team at the mobile device security firm Bluebox Security, which says that 99 per cent of Android smartphones could be hacked and infected with a Trojan virus. Any model bought in the past four years is vulnerable, which the security company estimates to be 900 million devices.

“Depending on the type of application, a hacker can exploit the vulnerability for anything from data theft to creation of a mobile botnet,” writes Bluebox CTO Jeff Forristal on the company’s blog.

Given that many smartphones are connected to other servers, the potential ramifications are amplified for businesses that use Androids.

Forristal goes on to write that Bluebox Security notified Google of the potential problem in February of this year.

TechCrunch reports that there is already a patch to fix the issue on the Samsung Galaxy S4. Google, however, has yet to release a fix. And it’s not commenting on the Blubox report at this time.

Tech blog Gigaom writes that Google has made security updates to its Play Store, so users downloading apps from this source should be relatively secure.

Until Google develops a patch to fix the problem, Bluebox recommend that Android users take these precautions:

Device owners should be extra cautious in identifying the publisher of the app they want to download.

Enterprises with BYOD implementations should use this news to prompt all users to update their devices, and to highlight the importance of keeping their devices updated.

IT should see this vulnerability as another driver to move beyond just device management to focus on deep device integrity checking and securing corporate data.

]]>NEW YORK, N.Y. – Law enforcement officials nationwide are demanding the creation of a “kill switch” that would render smartphones inoperable after they are stolen, New York’s top prosecutor said Thursday in a clear warning to the world’s smartphone manufacturers.

Citing statistics showing that 1 in 3 robberies nationwide involve the theft of a mobile phone, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman announced the formation of a coalition of law enforcement agencies devoted to stamping out what he called an “epidemic” of smartphone robberies.

“All too often, these robberies turn violent,” said Schneiderman, who was joined at a news conference by San Francisco District Attorney George Gascon. “There are assaults. There are murders.”

The coalition, which is called the Secure Our Smartphones Initiative and includes prosecutors, police, political officials and consumer advocates from more than a dozen states, will pressure smartphone companies and their shareholders to help dry up the secondary market in stolen phones.

The announcement came on the same day Gascon and Schneiderman were scheduled to co-host a “Smartphone Summit” with representatives from major smartphone makers Apple Inc., Samsung Electronics Co., Google Inc. and Microsoft Corp.

“We’re prepared to deepen our inquiry if that is appropriate,” Schneiderman said, though he would not elaborate on how far his office might go to ensure that manufacturers comply with the coalition’s demands.

He likened the functionality of a “kill switch” to the ability for consumers to cancel a stolen credit card.

The general public should not be forced to pay more for smartphones that have a “kill switch,” Schneiderman said.

Apple said at a developers’ conference this week that such a feature would be part of its iOS7 software to be released in the fall. Gascon and Schneiderman said in a statement they were appreciative of the gesture but would reserve judgment until they could “understand its actual functionality.”

“Apple has been very vague as to what the system will do,” Gascon said at the news conference. “We’ve been led to believe that it is not a ‘kill switch.'”

Gascon was particularly critical of Apple, saying that he had met with the company in January but was rebuffed by executives.

“The industry has a moral and social obligation to fix this problem,” Gascon said.

To drive home their point about the danger of violent smartphone thefts, authorities introduced relatives of 23-year-old Megan Boken, who was shot and killed in St. Louis in 2012 by an assailant who was trying to steal her iPhone.

Boken was chatting with her mother on the phone at the time, said her father, Paul Boken.

“All of a sudden, the phone went blank,” he told reporters. “Megan never picked the phone up again.”

In New York, police have coined the term “Apple-picking” to describe thefts of the popular iPhone and other mobile products, like iPads. Phone thefts comprise 40 per cent of all robberies in New York City, authorities say.

Authorities are pushing for the industry to move ahead quickly with this new security-focused technology. By early next year, all smartphones should be equipped with the new protective software, Schneiderman said.

BlackBerry (formerly Research In Motion Ltd.) continues to prove its harshest critics wrong. The company today posted a return to profitability in the fourth quarter, announced the retirement of co-founder and board vice chair Mike Lazaridis and revealed that the company sold about a million devices running its new BB10 platform during the three-month period. The device sales were in-line with Wall Street’s expectations and were considerably more than the 300,000 or so predicted by some of the more bearish analysts following the stock.

It’s the first piece of solid data about the company’s efforts to make the transition from its legacy OS to a new platform. Though still too early to call BB10 a success, CEO Thorsten Heins said during a conference call that more than 50 per cent of people who have bought a BlackBerry Z10 touchscreen were non-BlackBerry customers, which bodes well for the company’s early efforts to win back market share from industry leaders Apple and Google. A version of the device featuring a physical keyboard is expected to launch soon.

Key to BlackBerry’s comeback will be making an impact in the huge U.S. market. While some analysts have expressed concerns about the Z10’s mid-March U.S. launch, Heins suggested it was far too early to pass judgment (the figures reported today only include sales up until March 2). He also cautioned against making assumptions about Z10 sales based on spot checks with retailers. “Guessing the store line-ups has become a bit of a spectator sport in our industry,” Heins said. “I would like to emphasize that BlackBerry 10 has a phased roll out.” In other words, investors will have to wait another three months for more answers.

In 2005, Walter De Brouwer’s five-year-old son was rushed to the hospital with a severe head injury after falling more than 30 feet out of a window. In the three months that his son spent in the intensive care unit, De Brouwer, a Belgian tech entrepreneur transplanted to Silicon Valley, took to learning the myriad hospital machinery that tracked his son’s vital signs. He began bringing his laptop to the hospital, copying the reams of data into an Excel spreadsheet to study the relationship between his son’s blood pressure and heart rate, or the way his condition seemed to decline around the same time each night.

When his son was well enough to be discharged to a regular hospital room, De Brouwer panicked. “I knew this environment and these numbers and then I had to go to a room with no numbers, not even a computer,” he says. “I thought, ‘Why do I only have a thermometer at home?’ Perhaps we should know more about our health before it gets bad.”

The experience gave him the idea for the Scanadu Scout, a futuristic palm-sized device that can monitor five different vital signs, including temperature, heart rate and blood oxygenation level, by just holding it to your temple for 10 seconds. It then transmits the results wirelessly to your smartphone so you can track your health information over time, seeing, for instance, if a certain medication makes your heart rate climb, or what’s going on inside your body on those nights when you can’t fall asleep.

Pending approval by U.S. regulators, De Brouwer hopes to have the Scout on the market at the end of the year for $150. Getting regulatory approval to sell the device in Canada is the next logical extension, he says.

The company offers the promise of “sending your smartphone to med school” in recognition of the fact that today’s smartphones, with their powerful processors and high-speed Internet connections, have the potential to become pocket-sized, wireless diagnostic machines. That idea, says De Brouwer, is already having a profound effect on medicine. “In the next three to four years a big part of preventative medicine will be taken up by the Internet of things around us, which will communicate with our phone,” he says. “When we have an accident and people rush to us they won’t be coming to feel our bodies, but to look at our phone.”

Scanadu is developing disposable test strips that can be scanned at home by your phone to analyze saliva for different strains of the flu or strep throat, or to check urine samples for urinary tract infections, renal failure or complications from pregnancy.

De Brouwer is hardly the only Silicon Valley entrepreneur working to revolutionize the doctor-patient relationship. There are now as many as 18,000 medical apps aimed at consumers that promise to diagnose illness, suggest appropriate treatment or monitor a patient’s health status. While they range from free programs based on pseudo-science, to apps designed by some of the continent’s top medical research universities, all are part of a broader movement to fundamentally shift power away from doctors and into the hands of patients themselves.

Even as technology is opening new opportunities for medicine, it is also creating new dangers. As is the case with flesh and blood doctors, the diagnosis is only as good as the app or device you’re using. With regulators struggling to keep up with the hundreds of new health-related apps uploaded to the Internet daily, it means personal health care is becoming something of a Wild West frontier. But it also means the days of relying on your family doctor to figure out what’s wrong with you—a diagnostic process virtually unchanged for generations—are quickly coming to an end.

Consumer devices that track your vital signs have long been popular among amateur and professional athletes who use heart-rate monitors and GPS-enabled wristbands that measure speed and distance travelled during training. But as the technology has evolved, it has also attracted those with chronic health conditions. These “e-patients” are part of a more wide-ranging shift in the health care system driven by consumers themselves.

“If you were to pick one thing to correlate with how good a doctor is going to be, a pretty good pick is how many cases of a particular condition and a particular treatment they have seen,” says Sean Ahrens, a San Francisco-based software engineer. “What if there was a doctor who could see a million patients, or every single case in the world? It’s impossible for a human to do that, but maybe software can pull off that feat.”

After suffering a painful flare-up of Crohn’s disease, an incurable chronic inflammation of the digestive tract, Ahrens did what millions of people do every day: he went online in search of help.

Ahrens has suffered from Crohn’s since he was 12, when he was hospitalized after suddenly losing 30 lb. Now 26, he had exhausted every available treatment and was left with the option of having doctors surgically remove sections of his intestines.

The alternative he discovered was helminthic therapy, an experimental treatment not approved by regulators that involves ingesting parasitic worms. He found a company in Germany willing to mail him the parasites (he actually did ingest the worms for a while), but he abandoned the experiment after his symptoms got worse—and then suddenly got better.

The experience convinced him that buried in his small act of self-experimentation was vital information about a potential new therapy. Multiply Ahrens’s story by the hundreds or thousands of other patients who are popping vitamins, changing up their diets or experimenting with the multitude of other alternative therapies, often without telling their doctors and, he says, the world was losing a treasure trove of first-hand medical data that wasn’t being captured by any official clinical study of Crohn’s disease. “No one was listening to them,” he says. “Just because it’s not being done in a lab with a doctor and a researcher present, doesn’t mean this data isn’t valuable.”

In 2011, he created Crohnology.com, a social networking site for people suffering from Crohn’s and colitis. Patients can go online to track their daily health, report flare-ups and rate their treatments. They can send a text message to update how they’re feeling, which the site will also log and track over time. But more important, says Ahrens, is Crohnology’s ability to take the immense data it collects from its 2,500 members on every treatment, both prescribed and self-administered, and analyze it for trends. So far, the site’s users have reported that giving up beer offers the best results, followed by doses of vitamin B12 and use of the prescription drug prednisone.

It’s what Ahrens calls an open-source clinical trial with the ultimate goal of building a Crohn’s “superdoctor” designed by patients themselves. He’s now planning similar sites for two other autoimmune disorders, multiple sclerosis and rheumatoid arthritis. Doctors and other non-patients get limited guest privileges on the site and Ahrens hopes to eventually conduct more structured experiments and potentially share some of Crohnology’s data with non-profits that are researching treatments and cures.

Already, Patientslikeme.com, a website started by MIT grads, has conducted what’s widely considered to be the first clinical drug trial over social media when, in 2008, more than 300 of its members with ALS, or Lou Gehrig’s disease, tracked their experiments with the prescription drug lithium as a possible treatment. They found no evidence it helped with their condition. Two years later, a clinical study funded by the U.S. National Institutes of Health came to the same conclusion.

“It’s the most radical change in the history of medicine that we’re looking at here,” says Dr. Eric Topol, a prominent U.S. cardiologist and director of the Scripps Translational Science Institute. “It used to be all the information, all the control, was harboured with the doctor and the health care professional. That’s shifted to where the consumer, the patient, is getting their own data and through various means, and deciding whether they want to share it and with whom and when. They’re in control.”

Topol has become one of North America’s most vocal proponents of consumer health technology with his book, The Creative Destruction of Medicine. He says he now prescribes more apps to his patients than pharmaceuticals. Virtually all of his patients with hypertension use smartphone apps that help them monitor their blood pressure and send him screenshots of their readings in advance of their visits. “I get so much enriched information and the patient is diagnosing himself or herself,” he says. “I haven’t had anyone who hasn’t embraced it.”

Personal health care technology is attracting significant attention from investors. Silicon Valley start-up incubator Rock Health reported last year that venture capital funding for digital health grew from $968 million to $1.4 billion, even as funding for traditional medical devices and biotech firms dropped. The biggest increase was in consumer health devices, with $150 million invested into start-ups for personal health-tracking tools and $237 million into online health resources.

While most consumer apps amount to software versions of classic fitness technologies like calorie counters, heart-rate monitors and pedometers, there is an increasing array of sophisticated medical software and tools being developed, some for consumers with specific medical issues and others exclusively for health care professionals. There are now dozens of smartphone apps to help diabetics track their glucose levels and even more that promise to analyze your sleep patterns and suggest ways to get a better night’s rest.

In Canada, hospitals are increasingly using smartphone technology to interact with patients. University Health Network’s Centre for Global eHealth Innovation in Toronto developed apps that warn asthmatics of local weather that could affect their condition and alert patients with hypertension if they’ve missed a blood pressure reading. In a pilot project the centre ran with the Hospital for Sick Children, teenagers with Type 1 diabetes installed apps on their phones that prompted them to regularly check their blood sugar and then rewarded them with iTunes gift cards. Women’s College Hospital in Toronto had patients recovering from breast reconstruction surgery take photos with their phones of their surgical wounds so doctors could remotely monitor their healing.

Meanwhile, researchers elsewhere have shown that it’s possible to accurately measure someone’s pulse using the camera on a phone. At MIT, researchers have developed a prototype of a smartphone attachment that costs just $2 and can conduct an eye exam to determine the prescription for glasses—a potential boon for people in remote parts of the world. In 2011, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which regulates medical devices, approved a portable ultrasound device that plugs into a smartphone.

One of Topol’s favourites is an app from the Oklahoma tech company AliveCor that uses a credit-card sized sensor that fits over the back of an iPhone, turning it into a portable electrocardiogram machine to monitor the electrical impulses from the heart. So far the device is available only for health care professionals, but the company says it is working on a consumer version. Topol says he often uses the device with patients instead of a traditional ECG machine. Last year, he was on his way home to San Diego from demonstrating the device at a National Institutes of Health conference in Washington when flight attendants began calling for a doctor to help a with a passenger in distress. Topol pressed the phone’s sensors to the passenger’s chest and determined he was having a heart attack. The plane made an emergency landing outside of Cincinnati.

Perhaps the holy Grail of futuristic medical devices is the tricorder, the mythical handheld device used by every Star Trek doctor since the 1960s to remotely scan patients and come up with an instantaneous diagnosis. It’s no surprise that researchers in Silicon Valley are furiously trying to build one of their own.

Last year, Peter Diamandis, the Harvard MD whose multi-million-dollar X Prize foundation pioneered commercial space travel, launched his newest competition: a $20-million contest to build the world’s first working tricorder. The winning device must be designed for consumers and able to diagnose 15 different conditions, from pneumonia, to diabetes, to sleep apnea, as reliably as a panel of doctors. It has attracted more than 250 teams—including De Brouwer’s Scanadu—and expects to award the prize in September 2015.

The potential for a working tricorder to help consumers diagnose their own conditions is endless, says X Prize senior director Mark Winter. It could, for instance, mean being able to diagnose whether the pain in your side is appendicitis—an emergency condition—or whether you’ve just pulled a muscle in your back. Mothers could use the device to analyze the bacteria in a child’s breath to find out if they have pneumonia or a routine cold. It could also transmit that data to your local hospital so doctors already have an idea of what’s wrong before you even walk in the door.

“If you think of the mom as being the medical manager of the household and the tools she’s had over the years are a telephone and a mercury thermometer, think about arming mom with more tools to decide what to do next,” says Don Jones at Qualcomm, the wireless technology manufacturer sponsoring the tricorder competition. “That’s really what we’re talking about. It’s just leapfrogging down that toolset.”

A tricorder-like device could be routinely handed out to patients by doctors or insurance companies as a way to cut down on both the costs and the demands on the health care system, Jones says. “Frankly, many consumers are going to say this is more convenient than booking an appointment and not getting one for a week,” he says. “The entities that are financially responsible for people’s health—insurers, governments, large employers, unions and, increasingly, health care providers themselves—if they can get people to take on the responsibility of managing some of their own care, it’s a logical solution because we’re headed to a situation where we’re not going to have enough primary care providers to deal with the demands on the system over the next 30 years.”

Jones says much of the sensor technology to collect the reams of physiological data required to make such diagnoses already exists and is relatively cheap. The challenge is to integrate it into a single small device with software that can analyze the constant stream of data coming from the human body and make reliable predictions.

Such breakthroughs are already happening. Sano Intelligence, a San Francisco start-up, is developing a sensor the size of a nicotine patch that can wirelessly transmit blood chemistry data and hopes to eventually measure kidney function and electrolytes. U.K.-based DNA Electronics is building a handheld device that plugs into a tablet or laptop and uses DNA testing to see whether you might have a bad reaction to a specific prescription drug. The test is aimed at the average consumer and takes around 30 minutes.

Even more sci-fi like, researchers at Scripps Translational Science Institute in California are working on a sensor about the size of a grain of sand, called a “nanosensor,” that can be inserted into arteries. It uses laser light to detect the presence of specific proteins that warn of diseases and can then transmit that information to your phone. Researchers say it could be used to predict an impending heart attack several weeks in advance, or to detect that an organ is failing long before more obvious symptoms emerge.

The future of consumer medical technology seems limitless. But the field has also attracted its share of questionable claims. In the U.S., the FDA has already banned two smartphone apps that promised to cure acne just by holding the phone to your skin. A study last month from the University of Pittsburgh tested four apps that claimed to be able to detect to melanoma, a potentially deadly skin cancer, by having people take pictures of their moles with their phone’s camera. On average, it found the three apps that used computer algorithms to examine moles got it wrong 30 per cent of the time. A fourth app, which allowed users to send a photo of their mole to a real dermatologist, had a 98 per cent success rate. It cost just $5 per picture and guaranteed results within 24 hours. That compares to a wait of up to six months for an appointment to see a dermatologist to make a similar visual assessment.

Health regulators have been slow to acknowledge the rapidly advancing medical technology aimed at consumers. In Canada, legislation limits Health Canada to regulating medical devices that are for sale. That covers a host of devices and software, but not, for instance, apps that are offered free to consumers from health care providers, or are hosted in other countries but which Canadians can access remotely over the web.

Software running over the cloud that can instantly turn your phone into a diagnostic device is “a huge loophole,” Sarah Chandler of the medical devices bureau of Health Canada, told a mobile health conference in Toronto earlier this month.

Will Falk, managing partner of health care at PricewaterhouseCoopers and a professor at the Rotman School of Management, suspects that eventually regulators and doctors will begin filtering the thousands of medical smartphone apps just as they do pharmaceuticals, with doctors prescribing the most reliable apps to their patients. “Your family doctor is going to have to have an opinion on this, the same way they have an opinion on the drugs you take, because devices are replacing drugs,” he says. “But we’ve got to have some control over these apps. It’s going to be an app pharmacy. Not an app store.”

Until the distant day that smartphones can reliably perform complex surgery without any human intervention, there will always be a place for medical specialists. We will also still need family doctors to prescribe medications and issue referrals. But technology is making it possible to weed out the people who don’t need to go to the doctor at all, saving the health care system for the sickest patients. Those who still need a doctor will come armed with better information about their bodies.

Scanadu’s De Brouwer believes the family doctor of the future will be a comforting voice to provide support and a second opinion to patients who are diagnosing themselves on their smartphones. Sean Ahrens, the Crohnology founder, predicts that technological advances will one day make going to the doctor’s office as obsolete as going to the video store to rent a VHS. “In 50 years time will a doctor no longer really play much of the role they currently play in health care?” he asks. “I think that’s a real possibility.”

]]>With concerns mounting about slowing growth and increased competition from rivals, Apple investors were hoping the iPhone—and iPad—maker would blow the doors off of its first quarter financial results. But while the Cupertino, Calif. company came close, it didn’t quite meet Wall Street’s expectations.

Apple reported earnings of $13.1 billion (U.S.) in the first quarter, about the same as what it earned during the same period last year. But investors were focused on Apple’s $54.5 billion in sales, which was less than the $54.9 billion that was expected by analysts. Another key figure—profit margin—also came in below the Street’s expectations at 38.6 per cent instead of 39.5 per cent, suggesting Apple’s ability to command a premium price for its products in the face of competition from rivals like Samsung is slipping faster than anticipated. Shares of Apple dropped below $500 in after-market trading. The stock has fallen by 26 per cent since September.

As for device sales, Apple said it sold 47.8 million iPhones, 22.9 million iPads, 4.1 million Macs and 12.7 million iPods in the quarter.

CEO Tim Cook reminded analysts on a conference call that Apple remains an impressive story, noting that it has so far sold well over half a billion devices running its mobile iOS platform. He also took on rumours that demand for the iPhone, which accounts for nearly half of all sales, was faltering amid reports it had cut orders for parts from some of its suppliers. “The supply chain is very complex,” Cook said, adding that it would be a mistake to try to interpret a single piece of data, even if it’s accurate, as being representative of Apple’s broader business. He also said initial iPhone 5 sales were constrained by Apple’s ability to make them quickly enough.

Apple is still an impressive company with impressive prospects. But investors have grown accustomed to being dazzled. Good simply isn’t good enough anymore.

Having trouble focusing on that 30-page contract? Just got chewed out by your boss and wish you had reacted more calmly? Trying to stay relaxed before a life-or-death job interview? Not only will there soon be an app for all that, but it’ll be one that you control with your mind.

This spring, the Toronto-based tech company InteraXon will release a product called Muse, a wearable brainwave reader that connects wirelessly to any smartphone or tablet device. Much like a heart monitor can measure physical exertion, Muse gauges levels of concentration, stress and relaxation. Through an app and various games that come bundled with the device, users will be able to strengthen those parts of their brains responsible for working memory and focus.

Using software originally created by the renowned University of Toronto engineer and cyberneticist Steve Mann (often dubbed “the world’s first cyborg”), thought-controlled computing technology translates brainwaves into digital signals recognizable by a computer—be it the chip in a video game, espresso maker or automobile. In other words, the brain’s electrical activity, which can be trained just like any muscle, is converted by an interface into binary code.

In 2007, a trio of young Mann disciples formed InteraXon to develop commercial applications for the technology. The company first entered the public consciousness with a trippy demo during the 2010 Winter Olympics that allowed headset-equipped visitors in Vancouver to mentally control light shows at the CN Tower and Niagara Falls.

Muse is the company’s first consumer product, a device that is, according to co-founder and CEO Ariel Garten, “a jumping-off point for an entire future of interacting with content and objects directly with our minds.” While brain-computer interface (BCI) technology has been available for several decades—everyone from Mattel to the Australian electronics firm Emotiv has developed various BCI-enabled toys and assistive devices—InteraXon is the only significant Canadian player in the field. And it has concentrated its efforts on trying to make the technology as affordable, stylish and unobtrusive as possible. Muse is a thin, lightweight, sensor-equipped headband hardly more ostentatious than the average Bluetooth headset. It’s designed to be worn round-the-clock so that users can build a comprehensive profile of their brain activity, store the data in their phones, and track their progress over time.

Muse will retail for $199 at mainstream electronics stores (Garten won’t reveal specific dealers yet), coupled with the brain-fitness application and a software development kit so users can build their own apps. Funding for the product—Garten estimates it has cost millions in research and development—has come from a variety of sources, primarily government grants, angel investors and venture capital. A crowd-funding campaign has raised more than $200,000. (For donations of $8,500 or more, InteraXon will show up at your house or party with their thought-controlled beer tap.)

A Muse prototype was unveiled last year in conjunction with a 3D TV “environment,” a whimsical and eerily tactile winterscape created by Toronto artist Alex McLeod. Using the Muse, viewers can manipulate elements of the environment—a flock of birds, say, or a boat in the water—by relaxing (thereby amping up alpha waves) or grinding their teeth. McLeod was mesmerized by the result. “I couldn’t believe it,” he says. “Being able to control things with my mind, it felt like it was right in front of me.”

Avianna Chao, a software engineer and a member of the Canadian national pistol team, will begin training with the Muse next year, leading up to the 2015 Pan Am games. “Our sport is all about precision,” she says. “You have to be able to focus when you need to focus and relax when you need to relax. This is like a gateway to your brain.”

Muse’s potential uses seem limited only by the imagination, and Garten says that various medical devices employing the same basic technology are also in the works. Working with the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health and Toronto Western Hospital, InteraXon is developing an ADHD trainer for children and a system to warn epileptics and their caregivers of an impending seizure.

“Our initial idea was: how to control the world with your mind?” Garten says. “Now it’s more important to us to have a world that understands and adapts to your needs. It’s about helping people become better at doing what they want to do.”

Rock demigod Jack White recently left the stage unexpectedly early to the disdain of a New York City audience. No official reason has been given, but at the beginning of the show he had asked audiences to refrain from filming.

To ask this of an audience in 2012 is akin to asking them to refrain from using Facebook for a month. In all likelihood, the audience ignored that rare but understandable request and White was angered by their disobedience.

Either way, the smartphone is an now unavoidable vexation at virtually any major concert. The more prolific the song, the higher number of people reach for their phones to film the experience, rather than jump up and down like wild animals.

When did concert-goers become incapable of existing in the moment?

Who is so important that, rather than enjoy a band’s signature hit by waving one’s hands back and forth, one is instead carefully maneuvering their phone to capture the best possible angle?

It has come to a point where we feel the need for our experiences to be validated through film. No longer can we just share a story orally and feel fulfilled by that. No, we must convey our experiences to friends and family by posting some twisted technological badge of honour on social media.

Concert-goers now routinely sacrifice their own personal enjoyment in favour of the gratification felt from later social media acceptance. To post a performance of Jack White on YouTube somehow now trumps the memory of actually having seen him play live.

The behaviour has made watching live performances on Jimmy Kimmel Live or televised festivals borderline unbearable. Rather than witnessing a massive mosh pit or a crowd roaring in unison, one is instead treated to an endless field of smartphones zoomed in on the performance. This despite the fact that the concert is being broadcast in high definition across the continent.

Such a robotic approach to concerts must be rather uninspiring for musicians like Jack White to have to deal with. Rarely can a modern artist even peer into the eyes of a fans anymore, because fans’ eyes are now impeded by a new, bright, but lifeless set of eyes: glaring smart phone cameras.

Séamus Smyth is a student at SAIT in Calgary. This originally appeared in The Weal.

In light of yesterday’s post about how the expensive iPhone may be counter-productive to societal goals, I thought it might be prudent to also touch on the other side as well.

When the first device powered by Google’s Android software was unveiled in 2008, it was intended to shake up how phones were made and sold and also how the mobile Internet would be used.

Four years later, Android is on the cusp of global domination and Google is well on its way to accomplishing those goals. While it’s customary to fear a rising power, this may just be a positive development for phone users, especially those in poorer countries.

“It’s about being better connected with the knowledge of the world and democratizing forces,” said John Lagerling, director of global partnerships for Android. “These are people who have never had a computer.”

Google’s foray into the phone game, however, isn’t exactly altruistic. In the early 2000s, the company realized that the computer-based Internet it dominated was quickly shifting onto mobile devices. Not wanting to cede its command of the online advertising market, it offered Android, an operating system on which Internet-enabled smartphones could run, to any device maker that wanted it.

While Android enabled web surfing, email and other Internet applications just like its competitors, it was radically different because it was free. Both Apple and BlackBerry maker Research In Motion keep their software to themselves, while Microsoft charges manufacturers to use a mobile version of Windows. Estimates have pegged its licensing fee at $23 to $30 per phone, which in the developing world is enough to make the devices unaffordable.

Manufacturers such as Samsung, Motorola and Sony Ericsson have since run with Google’s free option. As a result, Android is the market leader in the United States and Europe. In developing regions such as Africa, Latin America, China and India, where Android phones can sell for $80 or less on contract, Google either claimed market leadership in 2011 or will in 2012, according to tracking firm Gartner.

The secret, Lagerling says, is that Android has made Internet-enabled phones much cheaper to produce. Not only is the software free, it also drives competition between device makers, which further brings down prices.

“By doing Android, we’ve been able to enable more [manufacturers] to enter the game. It used to be the bar was higher,” he said. In emerging markets, that means lesser-known makers such as Spice Mobile and Micromax can compete with global brands such as Samsung and LG.

Android is also successfully displacing Nokia in many developing countries. While the Finnish company used to dominate in such places, analysts say it has failed to react to changing tastes and needs.

“It really comes down to the full touch screen. Nokia still doesn’t have full touch down to a certain price point, whereas Android does,” said Carolina Milanesi, research vice-president for Gartner. The importance of touch screens over keyboards, combined with simple-to-use graphical interfaces, is hard to overstate in countries where literacy rates are still low, she adds.

“People without a keyboard can input things and get their meaning across without having to type.”

While smartphone adoption is still low compared to the developed world, growth is exploding in emerging markets. In Africa, for example, smartphones account for only three per cent of all mobile devices, but the percentage is expected to jump to 15 per cent by 2015, according to Informa Telecoms & Media.

The devices are simpler and don’t pack the latest super-high-resolution screens and cameras, like they do in North America. Users are also considerably less reliant on apps, which means they use their smartphones mainly for web surfing and email, but that’s still enough to change lifestyles.

Cheaper smartphones enable things “like what’s the going market rate for the crop or the foods that I gather every day, and knowing that before you actually go to the market,” Lagerling said.

Given the cost factors, analysts expect Android to continue leading the big smartphone growth in emerging markets. Just as in the developed world, the devices are now becoming accessible to every-day people, not just business executives.

“Android is the right [operating system] for many consumers at the right time,” said Kevin Restivo, senior mobility analyst for technology tracking firm IDC. “The price and the ‘good-enough’ quality is opening up the consumer segment.”

]]>Technology can be frustrating. But smartphones, with their tiny touchscreen keypads and countless bells and whistles, can be downright maddening at times. Who hasn’t felt the temptation to whack their device into submission at one time or another?

Microsoft, it seems, feels your frustration. It recently filed a patent for “controlling an audio signal of a mobile device by detecting a whack.” In other words, when you want to silence your phone, you hit it. Microsoft cites the growing “capability and complexity” of today’s mobile devices for the need for its whack-it function. Tech bloggers have responded with equal parts glee and tongue-in-cheek humour to the filing. “I hereby dub this the clapper of the modern world,” said The Next Web. Many hope to see the technology appear on phones running Microsoft’s new Windows 8 operating system. In an increasingly crowded smartphone market, even modest improvements can help a company stand out.

An Apple Senior VP demonstrates Flyover, part of the new map application featured on iOS 6. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

There’s a war going on for control of the world, in a figurative sense. We’re not talking about nation versus nation or a clash of ideologies (okay, on that one, maybe we are). We’re talking about Google versus Apple. More specifically, the maps that each company serves up on their respective smartphones—the applications that literally guide us around the world in our daily lives.

As almost every iPhone 5 reviewer has noted, including yours truly, Apple’s new device—which goes on sale today—is amazing in almost every way, with maps being a notable exception. For reasons no one is sure of yet, Apple has ditched Google-supplied data and is instead building its app using information supplied by GPS maker TomTom and a few other sources.

So, if you buy an iPhone 5 or new iPod that runs the latest software, iOS 6, or if you download that iOS 6 onto an older iPhone, iPod or iPad, you’ll get the new maps app. If you refrain from updating to the new software, you’ll keep the older version. For how long is another unknown.

App developers have noted that the foundation of Apple’s new maps system is actually quite good, it’s just lacking in data. As I mentioned in my review, there are some glaring omissions. The maps of Toronto, for example, show streetcar stops, but some subway stations are missing. It’s also given me faulty directions and locations on several occasions. And we all know that going to the wrong place because your GPS told you to go there is just about the worst thing ever.

Apple’s maps does have the cool 3D Flyover function that displays buildings in photo-realistic detail, but on the other hand it doesn’t have Google’s Street View. I may be lacking in imagination, but I’m not sure what practical use Flyover brings to the table. Street View, on the other hand, is very useful in getting a lay of the land for places you’ve never been.

The good news is, Apple’s new maps should get better over time, both because data is collected automatically (by cell towers) and through user feedback and input. With the zillions of iPhone 5s being sold, Apple will soon have access to a treasure trove of crowd-sourced editing. Still, Google has been doing maps and location services for years and has a big headstart. As such, on iPhone 5 launch day, Android has a big advantage in the case of maps. And it’s very unlikely that Apple will ever spend the big bucks needed to create its own version of Street View.

The questions, therefore, are: how did this happen and how long will it stay this way? In making maps take a step backward on the iPhone, who is the bad guy: Apple or Google?

Theories abound. Some believe Apple wanted to cut ties to Google, while others think Google pulled its data in order to make the iPhone and other Apple products look bad, thereby making Android phones look better.

The logic each way is a little baffling. Apple isn’t in the habit of substituting good technology with a lesser stand-in and it would be equally as strange for Google—a business built on absolute volume (it’s in the company’s frickin’ name!)—to pull its product from millions of phones simply out of spite. Neither is a smart business decision. Then again, billion-dollar patent victories have a way of adversely affecting logic.

Another piece of the puzzle comes in the form of YouTube. Apple also cut that app from the core iOS 6 update, yet Google wasted no time in making it available as a standalone app for iPhone users. Why hasn’t it done so with maps?

Again, it’s possible that Google is withholding maps in an effort to differentiate its Android phones from iPhone, but it’s equally likely that Apple may not allow such an app because it competes with a core function of its device. Apple doesn’t have its own version of YouTube, so Google is clear there, but does the company want competition on such an important part of its offering?

For Google’s part, here’s the statement a spokesperson gave me last week:

We believe Google Maps are the most comprehensive, accurate and easy-to-use maps in the world. Our goal is to make Google Maps available to everyone who wants to use it, regardless of device, browser, or operating system.

Is there meaning in that? It certainly can be interpreted a number of ways – as in Google wants to release an app, but perhaps Apple isn’t allowing it – but who really knows?

Ultimately, it all comes down to whether this is the new normal. Are Android and Apple going to start counting maps as a major differentiator between their devices, the same way that Sony and Microsoft use exclusive games (Halo versus Uncharted) to urge customers toward their consoles?

There are certainly pluses to that approach, but as anyone on the losing end of the deal would hope, it would be nice if the map competition was platform agnostic. Or at least iPhone users hope so.

In the long run, this Mapmageddon will probably be good for the world. Two powerful forces fighting it out for map supremacy is likely to mean one thing: better maps are coming.

The other day, a friend asked me whether he should buy the new iPhone 5. By virtue of writing about technology and gadgets for a living, it’s a question I get all the time – not necessarily about the new iPhone, but friends generally wanting advice on what smartphone they should get.

There’s never a simple answer, since every person’s needs are different. And it’s not just the device itself that matters, the carriers that offer them also factor into such a decision. My response is therefore always a flurry of questions in return: do you like physical keyboards, what kind of computer do you use, do you want to surf the web a lot, how much do you want to spend, do you travel a lot? Oh, and what are your politics? More on that last one in a second.

From there, we winnow down the options. If the buyer is on a budget, we’ll generally talk Android phones. If they don’t leave their home city much, we’ll discuss discount carriers such as Wind and Mobilicity. If a keyboard is a must, then it’s on to BlackBerry.

All things being equal, though, I often prescribe the iPhone, since it’s the best total package on the market. Not only does Apple produce top-notch hardware and software that works fluidly with it, it’s also got the widest catalog of apps available. While many have pointed out that the sheer number of apps means little (Apple boasts 600,000, or much more than competitors), in actuality it is important. Simple math equates that the more apps there are over all, the more likely it is that there will be more quality apps to choose from.

It’s definitely the case with Apple. Developers tend to create apps for its ecosystem first and they tend to put the most effort into it, because in doing so they can reach the millions of iPhone, iPod and iPad users out there. Other smartphones may have the iPhone beat in hardware specifications, but such devices are only as good as what users can do with them. In this sense, you can generally do more with an iPhone than with any other kind of smartphone.

Not surprisingly, Apple has the highest customer satisfaction rating of any smartphone maker, according to several measures including the American Customer Satisfaction Index and J.D. Power. Rare is the person who buys an iPhone and is dissatisfied with it.

Indeed, the iPhone 5—officially releasing this Friday—will continue that trend. While the new device has been criticized for being merely evolutionary rather than revolutionary, it still does everything well and just about every aspect is better than its predecessor.

That brings us back to my friend’s question: should he buy the iPhone 5, and more specifically, how should he buy it? As I noted last week, Canadians are in an especially tough spot when it comes to smartphones. Apple charges an arm and a leg for its phone. Whether you buy it unlocked and contract-free through one of the company’s stores or through a subsidized agreement with a carrier, you’ll end up paying through the nose.

Canadian carriers, meanwhile, are unique in insisting that buyers agree to three-year contracts, while two-year agreements are the norm elsewhere. That means Canadians tie in to the iPhone for longer and more money than just about anyone else. And just to add insult to injury, all iPhone models are $50 more in Canada than in the United States for no real reason.

My friend makes good money, travels a fair bit and, like many Canadians, has a distaste for our wireless carriers. I suggested he buy an unlocked version of the 16-gigabyte iPhone for $699 directly from Apple, which is not exactly easy to do. Such purchases can only be made online for now, since the company is looking to extract even more profit from early buyers by forcing them to activate their purchase with a wireless carrier in store, at least for the first few weeks. As reports have noted, doing this ensures Apple will get monthly kickbacks from the carriers.

My friend was willing to wait a few weeks for his new phone, so he ordered online. And really, unless your existing device is on its last legs, there’s no reason why you can’t also take this route. Once you’ve got that unlocked phone, a world of possibilities opens up.

For one thing, you can shop around for a plan from the various wireless carriers. In my experience, I’ve found that the big carriers tend to treat customers who bring along their own unlocked phones as unwanted stepchildren; without the ability to tie you into a contract, you’re a risky proposition who could flee at any time. They also know that all their monthly plans are in careful equilibrium with rivals’, so it’s not like you’re going to get a better deal somewhere else if they refuse to negotiate.

That said, no carrier likes to lose customers. It raises their churn rate, which financial analysts hate, and no carrier wants to see its stock punished by unhappy financial analysts. So if you’ve got an unlocked phone with no contract, your existing carrier has at least some incentive to try and make you happy.

Perhaps more importantly, the unlocked device is primed for local SIM cards if you travel to a different country. In most cases, you can buy a pay-as-you-go SIM, pop it in and use your phone without fear of an astronomical bill upon your return home. The iPhone 5 and other LTE phones may not work at their fastest speeds in other countries because of differing standards, but Apple’s device runs on a plethora of different frequencies, so you should be okay in most places.

In a worst-case scenario, you can at least get a prepaid voice SIM card that offers cheap local calling. I saw these being sold through a vending machine in New York’s JFK airport last week. Let’s face it – only executives with big expense accounts can afford to pay roaming charges.

The last bonus to an unlocked iPhone is its high resale rate. The iPhone 6 will inevitably come next year (or maybe it’ll be the iPhone 5S), with another one the year after that, and so on. Maybe you’ll want to move onto a different phone entirely. Who knows, maybe Research In Motion will come back with a BlackBerry that everyone will want? Stranger things have happened.

In any event, iPhones are like Toyotas—they retain their resale values nicely. Apple itself was offering up to $345 for the iPhone 4S as part of its recycling program. The bottom line is, there are many reasons to buy an unlocked iPhone.

Of course, not everyone has $700 to shell out up front. In that case, a three-year contract is the only option. The big three Canadian carriers are selling the three iPhone 5 models for $179 (16 GB), $279 (32 GB) and $379 (64 GB). In this case, there’s no real reason to go with the more expensive models. Only business users with very specific needs—or people who like to watch movies on really tiny screens—are likely to find any benefit to going with more storage, with 16 GB being more than enough for the average person.

Which brings us to that final question. It’s been said that the two things you should never discuss in public are politics and religion, because they inevitably end up setting people off into arguments. Apple can probably be added to that list. It’s a company that people either passionately love or hate.

Pure techies often hate on Apple because of the closed nature of its products and the controlling nature of the company itself. The non-techie majority, however, tend to love Apple products because they’re simple and elegant, even if they are pricey. That’s why the company has sold zillions of iPhones, iPads and iPods.

My circle of friends is made up of both types and there are some who would rather give themselves their own enema than buy an Apple product. For them, it’s a question of politics, or morals even.

That’s fair enough, yet it’s also amazing how the world has turned over the course of a few short years. There was a time, not so long ago, when the people who bought Apple products (mostly Mac computers) were elitists who looked down on the unwashed masses with scorn. Now, it’s the other way around. Those who swear off Apple’s products consider the millions who do buy them to be sheep.

]]>http://www.macleans.ca/society/technology/should-you-buy-an-iphone-5-probably-and-heres-how/feed/27Sept. 12, the new iPhone 5http://www.macleans.ca/economy/business/sept-12-the-new-iphone-5/
http://www.macleans.ca/economy/business/sept-12-the-new-iphone-5/#commentsWed, 12 Sep 2012 10:49:47 +0000http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=292454Apple and rivals are gearing up for the holiday shopping season

Apple's invitation to the Sept. 12 event featured the number "12" casting the shadow of the number "5", likely a hint to the launch of the new iPhone 5.

Watch our site for live coverage of the launch at 1 p.m.

NEW YORK, N.Y. – After weeks of speculation, anticipation and a dose of hype, Apple is widely expected to announce a new smartphone at an event in San Francisco on Wednesday.

Apple isn’t saying anything about the topic of the event, but the email invitation it sent to reporters contains a shadow in the shape of a “5” — a nod to the iPhone 5. It is being held in San Francisco at Yerba Buena Center for the Arts Theater, where Apple has held many product launches.

The new model is expected to work with fourth-generation, or 4G, cellular networks. That capability is something Samsung’s Galaxy S III and many other iPhone rivals already have. A bigger iPhone screen is also possible. The new model will likely go on sale in a week or two.

Apple Inc. also plans to update its phone software this fall and will ditch Google Inc.’s mapping service for its own, as a rivalry between the two companies intensifies.

In a related development, Google said Tuesday that it is releasing a new YouTube app for the iPhone and the iPad. The changes come amid the expiration of a five-year licensing agreement that had established YouTube as one of the built-in applications in Apple’s mobile devices.

Still unknown is whether Apple will announce a smaller version of its iPad on Wednesday.

Apple dominates the market for tablet computers, shipping seven out of every 10 tablets worldwide in the second quarter, according to research firm IHS iSuppli. Rivals have been trying to compete by producing smaller, cheaper models —such as Amazon’s Kindle Fire. A mini iPad would challenge those relative newcomers.

Sales of Apple’s iPhones are still strong, though the company lost the lead in smartphones to Samsung this year. Samsung Electronics Co. benefited from having its Galaxy S III out in the U.S. in June, while Apple was still selling an iPhone model it released last October. A new iPhone will allow Apple to recapture the attention and the revenue.

Amid expectations of a new iPhone, Amazon, Nokia and Motorola all tried to generate interest in their products last week, hoping that a head start on the buzz will translate into stronger sales. Makers of consumer electronics are refreshing their products for the holiday shopping season.

Amazon announced four new Kindle Fire models and a new line of stand-alone e-readers, while Nokia and Motorola unveiled five new smartphones between them.

Nokia and Microsoft, in particular, are trying to generate interest in a new Windows operating system out next month. The two phones announced by Nokia are among the first to run Windows Phone 8.

Here’s a look at what to expect in the coming months:

— REKINDLING THE FIRE

Amazon.com Inc.’s 7-inch (17.8-centimetre) Kindle Fire is one of the smaller tablets with decent sales. On Friday, it will sell an updated version with a faster processor, more memory and longer battery life. It will also cut the price to $159, from $199, making it far cheaper than the iPad, which starts at $399 for the 2011 version still on sale. (The most recent ones start at $499.)

Amazon is also releasing higher-end models under the Kindle Fire HD line. A 7-inch (17.8-centimetre) one will go for $199, while an 8.9-inch (22.6-centimetre) one will go for $299. There’s also a $499 model that can use the 4G cellular networks that phone companies have been building. A data plan will cost an extra $50 a year. The smaller HD model will start shipping Friday, while the larger ones will be available Nov. 20.

Amazon also refreshed its line of stand-alone e-readers, offering the Paperwhite, with its own light source. Tablets such as the iPad and the Fire don’t work as well in bright light because they are lit from the back. Amazon says the light on the Paperwhite is directed down at the display.

Barnes and Noble Inc., which makes the 7-inch (17.8-centimetre) Nook Tablet, may have an update this fall as well.

Toys R Us, meanwhile, said Monday that it is making a 7-inch (17.8-centimetre) tablet aimed at children. The Tabeo will go on sale Oct. 21 for $149.99.

— MOTOROLA’S RETURN

Though it’s a pioneer in the cellphone industry, Motorola hasn’t had a hit since the Razr phone came out in 2004. Under new owner Google Inc., Motorola Mobility is trying to change that.

Last week, Motorola announced three new smartphones bearing the Razr name. The $99 Droid Razr M will be in Verizon Wireless stores this Thursday, the day after Apple’s announcement.

Motorola will have two high-end models, the Razr HD and Razr Maxx HD, later this year. It’s emphasizing long battery life — up to 21 hours of talk time for the Maxx HD, or 10 hours of video streaming.

These are the first major products from Motorola since Google bought the company for $12.4 billion in May. Google, meanwhile, continues to sell a 7-inch (17.8-centimetre) Android tablet, the Nexus 7, made in partnership with AsusTek Computer Inc.

— CALLING ON WINDOWS

Microsoft Corp. will release a new version of the Windows operating system on Oct. 26, one that’s designed to work on both traditional computers and tablet devices. A new version of the Windows Phone system is coming out, too.

Once-dominant phone maker Nokia Corp. has been struggling in the shadow of Apple and Android, and it’s counting on the new Windows system for a revival. Last week, Nokia and Microsoft unveiled two new devices under Nokia’s Lumia brand — the 820 and the 920.

Nokia CEO Stephen Elop says the new phones will go on sale in the fourth quarter in “select markets.” He didn’t say what they would cost or which U.S. carriers would have them. Investors were disappointed, and Nokia’s stock fell 16 per cent on the day of the announcement.

Samsung, which surpassed Nokia as the world’s largest maker of mobile phones in 2011 and overtook Apple in smartphones this year, showed off a Windows 8 phone late last month. It didn’t announce an availability date either.

— SURFACE

Microsoft plans its own tablet computer, too. It’s new territory for Microsoft, which typically leaves it to others to make devices using its software. Now, it will be competing against its partners.

The Surface tablet will come in two versions, both with 10.6-inch (26.9-centimetre) screens, slightly larger than the iPad’s. One model will run on phone-style chips, just like the iPad, and will be sold for a similar price. A heavier, more expensive version will run on Intel chips and be capable of running standard Windows applications. The Surface will go on sale on Oct. 26.

— NEW BLACKBERRYS

A year ago Research In Motion Ltd. disclosed that it was working on a next-generation phone system for the BlackBerry, which now looks ancient next to the iPhone and Android devices. It was supposed to be out in time for this year’s holiday season. That won’t happen.

In June RIM pushed the release of BlackBerry 10 devices into early next year, saying it wasn’t ready. That means RIM will not only compete with the new iPhone and Android devices out this fall, but it will also have to contend with the new Windows devices.

As numerous analysts have pointed out, this week could make or break Nokia as it shows off its new Windows Phone 8 devices at a press event in New York. “Make” is actually a strong word – “stave off death” is probably more appropriate.

The storied Finnish cellphone maker, in partnership with Microsoft, is benefiting from some good timing in light of the big setback handed to Samsung by a court two weeks ago. With the court siding with Apple in that epic patent dispute, Samsung and other phone manufacturers using Google’s Android operating system are likely to be slowed down in the near term, at least in the all-important U.S. market.

That gives Nokia, which essentially put all of its eggs into Microsoft’s basket last year, a window of opportunity. Wireless carriers are now especially inclined to push Windows phones, to prevent Apple and perhaps even Android from gaining too much power over them.

So far though, Nokia and Microsoft have failed to spark the imaginations of the buying public. Windows phones, despite promising a very different experience from iPhone and Android devices, have captured less than 4 per cent of the global market, according to Strategy Analytics. That’s compared to 17 and 68 per cent respectively for Apple and Google. (BlackBerry, by the way, has plummeted to just 6 per cent, according to IDC.)

If whatever Nokia unveils this week – two phones are expected – isn’t a big hit, it may be hard for the company to continue on in its current form. Some analysts think the company might have to be sold or carved up for its parts. The most logical buyer would of course be Microsoft, if only for Nokia’s patents – which, as has become very apparent recently, are incredibly important.

Could Nokia also adopt that old adage of “if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em,” and ditch Windows for Android? Not likely. The company has already spent several years switching over from its own operating systems to Windows, suffering big losses along the way. Switching again would take time and more losses, which the company simply can’t afford.

What about Microsoft? Some observers believe this week is also the company’s last chance to get into the game, but it’s probably not that simple. Microsoft has cash to burn and thus the time to experiment. A good example of the company’s patience is the video game console world. Twelve years ago, people thought the company was nuts by getting into a market ruled by Sony and Nintendo. Now, many, many losses later, Microsoft is the global leader in consoles with the Xbox division delivering nice profits. Slow and steady does indeed sometimes win the race.

So what about RIM? As I wrote after the Apple-Samsung verdict, the BlackBerry maker is likely to miss out on the window of opportunity presented by the court, with new devices not expected till some time next year.

In the larger sense, one only has to look at the size of the companies involved in this battle for the mobile marketplace to see which way it’s likely to go. In phones, size is everything – the bigger the manufacturer, the cheaper they can build phones and the more of them they can sell. Looking at the market capitalization of the key players (as of this past Friday), it’s pretty clear the odds are heavily stacked against pure-play phone makers Nokia and RIM:

Apple: $623 billion

Microsoft: $259 billion

Google: $224 billion

Samsung: $161 billion

Nokia: $10 billion

Research In Motion: $3.4 billion

Regardless of what happens in the long run, I’ll be covering Nokia’s event in New York. Be sure to follow me on Twitter for live reports.

Students are hooking up more and more with wireless companies in the back-to-school season, making this period a key time for buying cellphones.

New smartphones are usually launched at this time along with plenty of deals as back-to-school starts to rival the holiday shopping season for cellphone sales, say analysts and wireless providers.

Computer science student Varun Vrayen was out this week cellphone shopping with his friends, all newly arrived from India to attend university. They were looking for unlimited calling to stay in touch with each other and call back home.

“If we need some help or if we’re lost in the city, we’ll need to talk,” said 23-year-old Vrayen, who was in Public Mobile store in downtown Montreal.

Public Mobile launched just more than two years ago in Ontario and Quebec, offering cellphones with no contract and no credit checks.

Telecom analyst Troy Crandall said there’s no one more “value oriented” than students and the new wireless providers have an opportunity to appeal directly to them.

“To me, it seems like prime time for these guys to get in and start going after these customers that are all looking for good value,” said Crandall of MacDougall, MacDougall & MacTier.

Other new wireless providers that have launched in the last several years are Wind Mobile, Mobilicity and Quebecor’s Videotron (TSX:QBR.B).

If students don’t want the “hottest phones out there,” there are still choices that offer good value, Crandall said.

But handset manufacturers are using this time to launch new smartphones, Crandall added.

Apple is expected to launch a new version of its iPhone in late September.

Samsung has unveiled a smartphone based on Microsoft’s new Windows Phone 8 operating system, and it just introduced a new version of the Galaxy Note smartphone-tablet hybrid device.

“It used to be that the Christmas holiday season was the biggest, but the shift is moving into the Q3 back-to-school season. You’re seeing that reflected in the launches of handsets,” Crandall said.

David Fuller, chief marketing officer at Telus, said smartphones are significant to the back-to-school season for the Vancouver-based wireless provider (TSX:T).

“There are as many or more smartphones bought by customers in the back-to-school time frame than at Christmas,” Fuller said.

“Students think of September as the start of their year,” he said. “You get a lot of students just naturally making technology buys in the back-to-school period.”

Fuller said Telus limits the number of promotions it offers in this period to avoid confusion, adding he believes the wireless industry “snows the consumer with 10,000 promotions,” too many for sales staff and consumers to digest.

Crandall said the back-to-school season continues right into early October and the benefits of it can spill into wireless companies’ fourth-quarter financial results, which include holiday shopping.

Pascal Picard, manager of sales and distribution at Public Mobile in Quebec, said the back-to-school season lasts longer than the holiday shopping period.

“I still believe Christmas is the biggest period for us but it’s so condensed,” Picard said. “Back-to-school is busy over a longer period.”

For Vrayen and his friends, everything is still new in Canada and their cellphones are indispensable to stay in touch with family, friends and girlfriends.

“We need to communicate,” said Karthikeyan Ramagzri Gajendran, 22, who is also studying computer science.

1979 sketch of the Digital Audio Player by British Investor Kane Kramer. Photo: Steve Nicholson

It took jurors three days to decide what an eight year old could have told you in seconds: Samsung copied Apple. Look at an iPhone, then look at a Galaxy. It’s obvious. But so what?

Though Apple was quick to describe the decision as a victory for its core values of “originality” and “innovation,” let’s remember some of the real values Apple is built upon. Steve Jobs, who once quoted (stole?) Picasso’s line about great artists stealing, was himself a wonderfully original thief. All of Apple’s innovations are slick remixes of pre-existing ideas, from the graphic user interface Jobs lifted from Xerox (which Bill Gates later copied from him) to the iPod, which Apple has acknowledged was basically invented by this British guy in 1979. Technology, like all of human culture, progresses bit by bit as we build on each other’s work. Patents are a regulatory system imposed on technology, intended to make sure that inventors get paid for inventing. But they didn’t work out for the British dude who invented the digital audio player, and they aren’t working now.

Patents have become mystical commodities, collected by massive tech firms as a means of taxing newcomers and keeping competitors in check. These so-called “patent wars” have become an arms race in which companies stockpile intellectual property claims in order to ward off litigation. Millions of dollars are paid for patents that a company may have no intention of using for anything but bluster. “Sue us,” the message goes, “and we’ll sue you.” Sometimes two opponents in an arms race can be so equally matched that nobody dares pull a trigger. Other times, things go nuclear, or “thermonuclear,” as Jobs described his coming war against Android, for daring to innovate upon his innovation. That’s what happened last week.

Make no mistake about it, Apple v. Samsung was actually Apple v. Android, and Android is the mobile operating system of the people. Google has done the world a service by releasing a free alternative to Apple’s proprietary iOs. Android is empowering millions with smartphone connectivity. Many of the people who use Android devices could never afford an iPhone. As Google and Apple compete to create the best mobile OS, building on each other’s innovations, the consumer benefits. It’s a far healthier form of competition than the stifling patent wars.

Apple’s patents claim ownership over finger gestures. Apple’s patents claim ownership over rounded rectangles. It’s silly, but it’s become common: Amazon famously claims a patent on buying things online with one click. In choosing to uphold these patents, in recognizing generic and obvious aspects of design as pieces of private property, U.S. courts are stifling innovation and quite possibly creating in Apple a tech monopoly that will make Microsoft look like the public library.

]]>http://www.macleans.ca/society/technology/apple-v-samsung-why-the-patent-war-risks-creating-a-tech-monster/feed/10Apple vs. Googlehttp://www.macleans.ca/society/technology/this-means-war/
http://www.macleans.ca/society/technology/this-means-war/#commentsFri, 17 Aug 2012 17:42:01 +0000http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=284111The leading players in the global smartphone market have very different ideas about what the future should look like

Siri, the iPhone’s voice-activated “virtual assistant,” kicked off this year’s Apple Worldwide Developers Conference in June by cracking jokes about San Francisco’s weather, Silicon Valley’s venture capitalists and other subjects only software engineers could find funny (“How many developers does it take change a light bulb? None, that’s a hardware problem”). But it wasn’t long before Siri launched a few verbal jabs at Google, as well as the Asian manufacturing giants that now churn out millions of iPhone-esque devices to run on its Android mobile software. “I’m excited about the new Samsung,” Siri deadpanned in her digital twang. “Not the phone—the refrigerator. Hubba, hubba.”

Siri’s gentle ribbing masked a deeper fallout between Apple and Google, once strategic partners. Before he died, Apple co-founder Steve Jobs told his biographer that Android was “grand theft” of the iPhone concept. “I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple’s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong,” he said. “I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go thermonuclear war on this.”

Many assumed Jobs was referring to the avalanche of patent infringement lawsuits Apple has launched against Samsung, HTC and others. But in recent months it’s become clear he had other plans too. At the same June developer’s conference, Apple unveiled a new mapping application that will replace Google Maps on the iPhone and iPad. Then, earlier this month, Apple revealed that iPhones and iPads would no longer ship with Google’s popular YouTube app pre-installed. Even Siri, though still a beta project, is considered by some to be an eventual replacement for Google’s ubiquitous search engine on future Apple machines. “Apple wants to cut the cord—any ties it has to Google,” says Kevin Restivo, a senior analyst with research firm IDC. “It’s a classic turf grab. The more control you have over the smartphone operating system and the user experience, the more lucrative it is.”

The stakes are huge. The global smartphone market, now worth about $50 billion, is expected to grow to as much as $237 billion by 2016, according to some estimates. And Apple and Google have very different ideas about what the future of the industry should look like. Apple, a notoriously control-oriented company, believes in building closed systems that allow it to dictate the user experience, making money from the sale of devices, music, TV shows and applications. Google, by contrast, favours a more freewheeling approach, handing out its software and services to whomever wants them and then selling all those eyeballs to advertisers.

The coming battle promises to reshape the industry as we know it. Although some tech bloggers have complained recently about a slowing pace of mobile innovation—a theory based mainly on the observation that most new phones look like carbon copies of Apple’s iPhone—the war for consumers’ wallets promises to yield an avalanche of new mobile products and services, ranging from digital payment systems to health-monitoring applications. “The Apple and Google we know today will be very different companies,” Restivo says. “Apple won’t be purely a hardware maker. And Google is quickly migrating away from its search-only business model.” And as they increasingly encroach into each other’s territory, the sparks are going to fly—with consumers poised to reap the benefits.

It wasn’t long ago that Apple and Google seemed to be a perfect match for each other. In 2007, Eric Schmidt, then Google’s CEO (now executive chairman), was on stage with Jobs as the first iPhone was introduced. “You can’t really think about the Internet without thinking about Google,” said Jobs, who wore his trademark black mock turtleneck, jeans and grey New Balance sneakers. At the time, Schmidt sat on Apple’s board and the two companies were seen as complementary. Apple built sleek, Web-enabled devices. Google indexed and delivered the Web’s billions of pages to users. Schmidt even joked onstage about a merger of the two companies, perhaps called “Applegoo.” Jobs chuckled.

But Jobs wasn’t laughing later that year when Google took the wraps off its Android mobile software, based on technology it had purchased two years earlier. Or when, in 2008, it launched its open-source handset alliance, a consortium of hardware, software and telecom companies that pledged to work together on developing feature-filled smartphones. The final straw came in 2009 when Android-powered touchscreens made by HTC and Samsung began hitting the market in large numbers. That August, Apple revealed that Schmidt would be leaving Apple’s board of directors as Google entered more of its core businesses.

Much to Apple’s chagrin, Google’s open-source Android project has been spectacularly successful. Android has risen to control nearly 68 per cent of the global market as of the second quarter of this year, according to IDC. By contrast, Apple’s share of the market is just 17 per cent, although sales of the iPhone have slowed in recent months as consumers wait for a new generation of the device, the iPhone 5, to be released this fall. Meanwhile, Nokia, Microsoft and troubled BlackBerry-maker Research In Motion each count for less than five per cent of the market, effectively making it a two-horse race.

Market share figures don’t tell the whole story, however. Unlike Apple, Google doesn’t make or sell phones, and its mobile advertising business is estimated to have generated just US$2.5 billion (a good chunk of which is believed to come from iPhone users) of its nearly $37 billion in 2011 ad revenue. By contrast, Apple is believed to earn more than half of its profit, which amounted to nearly $26 billion in the 2011 fiscal year, from sales of the iPhone alone. But with a plethora of cheap Android devices flooding the market, Apple’s enviable profit margins are now at risk.

In an effort to slow Google’s advance, Apple has turned to the courts, launching suits against Android handset makers in dozens of countries around the world. These include a $2.5-billion patent infringement filed in California against Samsung, which also happens to be one of Apple’s key component suppliers. It is akin to a proxy war between two superpowers. “Samsung is just a stand-in,” says Robin Feldman, a professor at the University of California’s Hastings College of the Law. “The larger battle is between Apple on one side and Google and the Android phone makers on the other. And it’s being fought in courtrooms across the U.S. and the world. This is about domination of the smartphone market.”

But while lawsuits can tie up competitors and besmirch reputations, Apple and Google both know the real victory will be decided in the marketplace. So while the lawyers argue, engineers in both companies are engaged in a mobile arms race. “This is not just about personal vendettas,” says Charles Golvin, an analyst at Forrester Research. “It’s about the much greater business opportunities at stake.”

The jockeying to win over the hearts, minds and wallets of consumers has seen Google and Apple engage each other on a number of fronts. In 2008, Google launched the Android Market, which aimed to replicate the success of Apple’s App Store. Apple retaliated in 2009 by rejecting an application to its mobile App Store for Google Voice, which allows users to make free calls to other phones within North America, as well as offering free features such as voice mail and text messaging. Analysts interpreted the move as an effort to protect Apple’s key carrier partners—namely AT&T, which had signed an exclusive five-year deal to sell the iPhone in the United States.

An even bigger threat to Apple emerged last year when Google made a bold, $12.5-billion bid for Motorola Mobility. While Motorola already makes Android devices like the Droid line of phones, the move will allow Google to more closely integrate its software and hardware, blunting a key Apple advantage in the process.

Other attacks have been subtle. Apple, for example, irked Google’s executives by shipping the iPhone with default browser settings that declined to accept cookies, the bits of code that advertising companies—like Google—use to track people’s behaviour on the web. Google responded with a workaround that bypassed the iPhone’s privacy settings and effectively allowed the tracking of users without their permission. Once exposed, the ruse led to an investigation by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, which last week ordered Google to pay a $22.5-million fine.

And then there are the dizzying number of competing services, all of which, analysts predict, will unleash a new wave of mobile innovation. To get you where you’re going: Apple’s new Maps application vs. Google Maps. To fill your phone with multimedia content: iTunes vs. Google Play. To supply you with local weather forecasts, traffic conditions or restaurant recommendations: Apple’s Siri digital assistant vs. Google Now. To allow for mobile payments: Apple’s upcoming Passbook vs. Google Wallet. To store your information: iCloud vs. Google Drive. The list goes on. “Just like any business, they want to do anything to keep you in one, single ecosystem,” says Ken Dulaney, an analyst at Gartner Research.

Yet even as the bullets fly, both sides are aware they can’t rid themselves of each other completely. Apple knows its users still want Google’s search engine, and Google still wants iPhone users to watch YouTube, which is why a Google spokesperson told Maclean’s it’s “working with Apple to ensure we have the best possible YouTube experience for iOS users.”

So who is likely to come out ahead? Gene Munster, an analyst at Piper Jaffray, says he’s betting on Apple over the next few years. As the smartphone wars enter their third inning, (the first being about the phones themselves, the second over apps), Munster argues the next battlefield will focus on integrated services that can be used to sell advertising. He notes that Apple has so far inked deals with Yelp (for restaurant reviews), Fandango (for movie tickets) and Open Table (for restaurant reservations), in the belief that such information is ultimately more useful to smartphone users than mere access to the web—particularly if it can be dialled up quickly and seamlessly. In Apple’s view, an iPhone user looking for a restaurant recommendation can just ask Siri where to eat, bypassing Google entirely. “If you look at the searches that are monetizable,” says Munster, “Apple appears to be going after the ones you can actually make money on.”

Of course, that assumes Siri works as advertised. So far it has failed to live up to expectations, getting stumped on basic questions or delivering inaccurate information. “It’s Apple’s attempt to get people to think about search differently,” says IDC’s Restivo. “But right now it’s more of a punchline than a competitive alternative.” Tim Cook, Apple’s CEO and former supply-chain guru, has nevertheless promised to “double down” on Siri’s core artificial intelligence technology, which, in fairness, is a field that has stumped computer engineers for decades. Not to be outdone, Google recently said it was updating its own voice-search application so its web searches would feel more personal and, effectively, Siri-like.

With each blow and counter-blow, Apple and Google are showing they’re prepared for a knock-down, drawn-out battle for industry supremacy. And that can only be a good thing for consumers. “There’s constant innovation in this space that far outpaces what we’ve seen in the PC world,” says Forrester’s Golvin, adding that the pitched battle between Apple and Google suggests there’s little risk of a comfortable duopoly forming any time soon. “We’re seeing constant innovation in displays, memory, sensors and image processing.”

]]>The new Galaxy smartphone charged Samsung Electronics Co. to a record quarterly profit of $5.9 billion, but executives still worry about the company’s performance in the jittery European market.

Samsung, the world’s largest maker of memory chips, mobile phones and flat-screen panels, does not seperate profits per division, but analysts believe that the jump in profits, up 79 per cent from the second quarter of 2011, is due almost entirely to the new Galaxy smartphone. The result, however, was shy of Samsung’s own forecast, resulting in the company trading at a two per cent loss yesterday in Seoul. The company has failed to keep up with demand for the Galaxy, causing delays in sales, and is in the midst of an intellectual property lawsuit with Apple that resulted in a temporary sales ban in the U.S.

Samsung’s biggest concern, though, remains Europe.

“Europe is our biggest consumer electronics market and we may have to initiate cost cuts and product price increases should the euro fall further from the current level,” an unnamed executive told Reuters. “Our smartphones are flying off the shelves, with some outlets reporting 40-60 percent sales growth, but that’s distorting the overall trading outlook which is more challenging due to the weak global economy and a weak Euro.”

To hear Dean Pacey describe online learning is a lesson in how the Internet—despite its vastness—can actually be a very personal place. In fact, taking courses over a computer, he believes, has the potential to make education more intimate and effective than any typical class-teacher setting, which is often full of distractions.

“When I go to university and I sign up for psych 100, I’m sitting with 1,500 other students with one talking head who I can’t hear and who may or may not speak English well at the front of the room,” he says. “How is that a rich experience?”

By comparison, Pacey imagines a world in which students in any country can pick and choose the courses they’d like to take over the Internet from the best international schools, many of which are in Canada. These courses would feature video lectures, online chats and news feeds related to the content, and would be delivered in whatever language the student preferred. Even more surprising: while the course content could be viewed on a computer screen or tablet, it would be designed, first and foremost, for smartphones—making the “classroom” entirely mobile and available anytime, anywhere.

Pacey is chief operating officer at ClevrU, a Waterloo, Ont.-based tech firm, which is set to offer this innovative virtual education as soon as this summer. And the target audience is just as compelling: developing countries, where there are millions of individuals who want an education but can’t afford it or access it locally—and where smartphones are common.

“Most people don’t have a desktop computer. Many don’t have a notebook. They may not have a house. But the one thing they will have is a feature phone that connects to the Internet,” says co-founder and CEO Dana Fox. “If you need an education, and you have a mobile device, you can now have what we have in Canada.”

Among the first investors in ClevrU, which was incorporated in 2010, was retired NHL superstar Eric Lindros. He learned about the company through a mutual contact and was intrigued. “Education gives people a chance to do whatever they want in the world. Without it, your options are numbered,” says Lindros, who works as a consultant. “Having a platform that allows people to educate themselves, no matter where they are, excited me.”

The first users will be in China, where demand for North American education is high—850,000 students come here annually to learn. Thousands more would too if they could pay for it, says executive vice-president David Murdoch, and if schools had room for them. Earlier this year, ClevrU partnered with two mobile carriers, China Unicom and China Telecom, which together represent over a quarter of a billion people. While the fees for courses and the credit-granting process are still being determined, many are buying in already. “The carriers have said to us, ‘We have nothing like this. You are the first to come along with e-teaching,’ ” says Fox. “China has gone through rapid development over the last 15 years. They want to integrate with the world economy. They’re reaching out to North America for those skills.”

To meet this growing demand, ClevrU has partnered with post-secondary schools and educational organizations, including Conestoga College in Kitchener, Ont., Wilfrid Laurier University in Waterloo, Georgian College in Barrie, Ont., and even Toronto-based TVO, which will design and supply their own content that users can download from the ClevrU website. They’re banking on ClevrU’s appeal in emerging markets to elevate their global brand and provide additional, novel income.

“ClevrU allows us to test the sale of our content in a completely new international market,” says Lisa DeWilde, CEO of TVO, which plans to offer 45 videos aimed at teaching English. Adds John Tibbits, president of Conestoga, which is developing plumbing courses for ClevrU, “We believe the content we will provide will be revenue-generating and will improve our reputation and create jobs.”

There are, of course, plenty of challenges ahead, including recruiting more content providers. And while competitors are scarce, the company must avoid the pitfalls that have ruined many Canadian tech giants. Pacey, who previously led Research in Motion’s foray into the U.S. and Europe, says that ClevrU can’t rely on one way of doing business. “We have to look very hard at how technology changes because it happens very quickly. If you get static, the risk is you become complacent, and someone replaces you.” The company will apply that philosophy as it moves into India and Latin America next.

For Tushar Singh, the 32-year-old co-founder of ClevrU and chief technology officer, the potential impact of providing education to those who are too poor or isolated to get one locally is what’s driving the company forward. “Education is a lifeline. It doesn’t just change a person, it also changes a community.”

]]>http://www.macleans.ca/education/uniandcollege/university-theres-an-app-for-that-2/feed/0University? There’s an app for thathttp://www.macleans.ca/society/technology/university-theres-an-app-for-that/
http://www.macleans.ca/society/technology/university-theres-an-app-for-that/#commentsThu, 07 Jun 2012 14:01:01 +0000http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=262468ClevrU is creating a class of international students by providing courses on smartphones

To hear Dean Pacey describe online learning is a lesson in how the Internet—despite its vastness—can actually be a very personal place. In fact, taking courses over a computer, he believes, has the potential to make education more intimate and effective than any typical class-teacher setting, which is often full of distractions. “When I go to university and I sign up for psych 100, I’m sitting with 1,500 other students with one talking head who I can’t hear and who may or may not speak English well at the front of the room,” he says. “How is that a rich experience?”

By comparison, Pacey imagines a world in which students in any country can pick and choose the courses they’d like to take over the Internet from the best international schools, many of which are in Canada. These courses would feature video lectures, online chats and news feeds related to the content, and would be delivered in whatever language the student preferred. Even more surprising: while the course content could be viewed on a computer screen or tablet, it would be designed, first and foremost, for smartphones—making the “classroom” entirely mobile and available anytime, anywhere.

Pacey is chief operating officer at ClevrU, a Waterloo, Ont.-based tech firm, which is set to offer this innovative virtual education as soon as this summer. And the target audience is just as compelling: developing countries, where there are millions of individuals who want an education but can’t afford it or access it locally—and where smartphones are common. “Most people don’t have a desktop computer. Many don’t have a notebook. They may not have a house. But the one thing they will have is a feature phone that connects to the Internet,” says co-founder and CEO Dana Fox. “If you need an education, and you have a mobile device, you can now have what we have in Canada.”

Among the first investors in ClevrU, which was incorporated in 2010, was retired NHL superstar Eric Lindros. He learned about the company through a mutual contact and was intrigued. “Education gives people a chance to do whatever they want in the world. Without it, your options are numbered,” says Lindros, who works as a consultant. “Having a platform that allows people to educate themselves, no matter where they are, excited me.”

The first users will be in China, where demand for North American education is high—850,000 students come here annually to learn. Thousands more would too if they could pay for it, says executive vice-president David Murdoch, and if schools had room for them. Earlier this year, ClevrU partnered with two mobile carriers, China Unicom and China Telecom, which together represent over a quarter of a billion people. While the fees for courses and the credit-granting process are still being determined, many are buying in already. “The carriers have said to us, ‘We have nothing like this. You are the first to come along with e-teaching,’ ” says Fox. “China has gone through rapid development over the last 15 years. They want to integrate with the world economy. They’re reaching out to North America for those skills.”

To meet this growing demand, ClevrU has partnered with post-secondary schools and educational organizations, including Conestoga College in Kitchener, Ont., Wilfrid Laurier University in Waterloo, Georgian College in Barrie, Ont., and even Toronto-based TVO, which will design and supply their own content that users can download from the ClevrU website. They’re banking on ClevrU’s appeal in emerging markets to elevate their global brand and provide additional, novel income. “ClevrU allows us to test the sale of our content in a completely new international market,” says Lisa DeWilde, CEO of TVO, which plans to offer 45 videos aimed at teaching English. Adds John Tibbits, president of Conestoga, which is developing plumbing courses for ClevrU, “We believe the content we will provide will be revenue-generating and will improve our reputation and create jobs.”

There are, of course, plenty of challenges ahead, including recruiting more content providers. And while competitors are scarce, the company must avoid the pitfalls that have ruined many Canadian tech giants. Pacey, who previously led Research in Motion’s foray into the U.S. and Europe, says that ClevrU can’t rely on one way of doing business. “We have to look very hard at how technology changes because it happens very quickly. If you get static, the risk is you become complacent, and someone replaces you.” The company will apply that philosophy as it moves into India and Latin America next.

For Tushar Singh, the 32-year-old co-founder of ClevrU and chief technology officer, the potential impact of providing education to those who are too poor or isolated to get one locally is what’s driving the company forward. “Education is a lifeline. It doesn’t just change a person, it also changes a community.”

]]>http://www.macleans.ca/society/technology/university-theres-an-app-for-that/feed/1Is the smartwatch going mainstream with Pebble?http://www.macleans.ca/economy/business/your-wrist-is-ringing/
http://www.macleans.ca/economy/business/your-wrist-is-ringing/#commentsWed, 09 May 2012 14:51:01 +0000http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=256443A Kickstarter bonanza suggests the smartwatch is an idea whose time has come

Once upon a time, you carried your watch in your pocket. Then it migrated to your wrist. Now the same thing may be about to happen to the smartphone. In April, Vancouver native Eric Migicovsky used the crowd-funding site Kickstarter to request start-up money for the Pebble, a wristwatch that will connect to an iPhone or Android and display emails, messages, and apps. The Pebble instantly became a fundraising phenomenon, racking up more than $7 million in contributions, a Kickstarter record.

When it’s ready to ship, the Pebble won’t be the first smartwatch. It won’t even be Migicovsky’s first, since his California-based company, Allerta, already marketed the Inpulse, a watch that told you when your BlackBerry had a message. But according to Wired magazine, smartwatches “haven’t really caught on with mainstream buyers,” so no major investors wanted to put money in the Pebble. Migicovsky, who studied at the University of Waterloo before moving to the States, told the blog Reyhani Law that he went to Kickstarter only because he “tried the traditional route and it didn’t work.” The Kickstarter bonanza was the first sign that the smartwatch is going mainstream.

What can a smartwatch do for you that a regular phone can’t? Well, for one thing, it spares you the need to reach into your pocket. Migicovsky said he came up with the idea for the Pebble “when I was cycling and I wanted to not drop my phone while riding.” The apps being developed for the watch are aimed at people who can’t hold a phone in their hands: there’s a GPS app for bike riders and a system for golfers to find their way around the course.

There’s one thing the Pebble has going against it, namely that it requires users to move their wrists in order to look at it. Other companies are quietly working on alternatives. Google announced recently that it was working on “augmented reality glasses,” which will provide smartphone-based information to the wearer. The important thing is that no one should ever have to move any body part in order to find out anything.

The PlayStation Vita, which launches on Feb. 22, has been getting a lot of press over the past few weeks, for a number of reasons. On the one hand, with gaming hardware continually getting more powerful, manufacturers are slowing down the rate at which they release next-generation machines. Home consoles such as the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 are now into their seventh and sixth years, respectively, which is considerably longer than the previous generation (the original Xbox, for example, had a four-year run before the Xbox 360 arrived).

Sony’s next-generation handheld is also getting a lot of attention because it is being released into a vastly different world than its predecessors. Over the past few years, smartphones and tablets have arisen to become mobile gaming powerhouses, leading observers to speculate on whether the death of portable systems such as the Vita is nigh. I spoke with Jack Tretton, CEO of Sony Computer Entertainment America, on the topic last week and he, of course, doesn’t see it that way.

At the Toronto launch of the Vita last Friday, I also had the pleasure of interviewing Ed Boon, co-creator of the hugely successful Mortal Kombat franchise of fighting games. Even if you’re not a gamer, you’ve probably been exposed to the Mortal Kombat pop culture phenomenon at some point over the years, perhaps with the 1995 movie (starring Christopher Lambert). I actually remember the techno-industrial soundtrack more.

The franchise will be coming to the Vita some time this year, although no release date has been announced yet. Boon and I discussed the game’s legacy, the opportunities and challenges of designing for portable systems and the threat of mobile games.

Q: What makes a good Mortal Kombat game?

A: It needs to be entertaining for and accessible to the player. Some games have really great features but they’re buried so deep where you have to do something so complicated that you can’t access them. Mortal Kombat has always been a game that most people can play and have a good time right off the top.

Q: What kind of elements are required, though? Do you constantly need new characters, for example?

A: Yeah, you have to have a balance between nostalgia and newness. A lot of people who play Mortal Kombat are going to want to see Sub Zero and Scorpion, Sonya and Jax, but at the same time they want to see something new because we’ve done a number of these games. The game we just released (last year for home consoles) is Mortal Kombat 9, so they really need to see something that’s a new experience or they’re going to feel like they’ve already played it.

Q: What sort of challenges have you faced in designing for the Vita?

A: The most unique thing about the Vita are the controls. You have a very powerful graphics system, like a console in your hand, but then you have these very unique controls, like accelerometer tilting, touch screen in the front and in the back. We really wanted to make sure we incorporated features that utilized those. With portable devices, people also tend to play them in shorter bursts so we designed modes that entertain players for five or 10 minutes at a time, which lets them play at a bus stop or coffee shop. At the same time, we also knew that people are fans of the original game so we wanted to give them all the content that we provided in the original console version.

Q: Did you feel like you had to shoehorn in all these controls or did you come up with ways to make them feel like natural parts of the game?

A: We just happened to have a feature called “challenge tower” in the previous Mortal Kombat game. It’s basically 300 short variations on the gameplay–some of them were really funny, some were serious, and with the Vita we found that this was exactly the sort of short gameplay that works so well on a portable unit. For the Vita we created 150 unique new ones. So if you’re playing the game and blood gets all over the screen, you can wipe it away (with your finger) like a windshield wiper or the characters who are fighting in the game, their heads start to inflate–you have to touch the head to deflate it or it’ll explode. All these sort of fun, unique novelties that you can enjoy in small doses, that’s a big part of it. At the same time, we’ve got online play, story mode, the original challenge tower and all of the features that made the original game such a big hit.

Q: There’s a lot of talk about how it’s more profitable for developers to create for tablets and smartphones than for dedicated handheld gaming systems. How do you feel about that?

A: I don’t think we can really ignore the power that some of these phones have but at the same time, there’s something about tactile control D-pads and analog sticks and the like–you really need those kinds of controls to get any kind of experience like you’re going to have on a console. That’s what lets us do something like Mortal Kombat so accurately on the Vita. It would be much more difficult to do that with only a touch screen because you don’t have the button technology that’s so familiar.

Q: Is it a case of profitability versus artistry then?

A: It all depends on the game. I’ve seen some really brilliant games for the phones that utilize the touch screen and whatnot, but at the same I’ve seen some games for systems like the Vita that really need that kind of feedback, like a physical controller. I do believe that the kind of game you’re making is going to be the determining factor at the end of the day.

Q: When you were making the very first Mortal Kombat game in 1992, what was your thinking behind it? Did you set out to make something vastly different from what was already out there?

A: We definitely didn’t just want to clone Street Fighter. I’m a huge fan of Street Fighter, but it has more of an anime, cartoon presentation. We wanted to do something that utilized digitized technology which, at the time–20 years ago–was state of the art. We just wanted a photo-realistic look so we always called it like the MTV version of Street Fighter. That really let us carve our own niche to the game. We also added a story element, which really helped drive making a movie, animated TV series and all that stuff. That gave us some further separation.

Sony’s next-generation handheld video game system, the whimsically named Vita, officially launches on Feb. 22 after shipping out this week to those who pre-ordered it. It’s a very impressive and attractively priced device–you can read my full review here.

At the Vita’s launch party in Los Angeles on Wednesday night, I chatted with Jack Tretton, president and CEO of Sony Computer Entertainment America, about the Vita, PlayStation and game trends in general. The Vita, as it turns out, comes along at a time of major change in the gaming industry.

Smartphones and tablets have opened up an entirely new frontier for the industry, with people who wouldn’t previously be caught playing video games now idling away for hours on Angry Birds and the like. Nintendo, Sony’s traditional rival in the handheld market, has already felt the pain, as people turned away from the more expensive and involved software produced for such devices and toward cheaper and simpler mobile games.

In discussing Sony’s long-term strategy with the Vita, Tretton said he’s not too worried about smartphones and tablets.

Q: Is the Vita being sold through the razor blade model, where the hardware is cheap but you’re going to try to make money on the software?

A: What we do at Sony is we invest in the technology long term. Ideally, with economies of scale we’ll be able to cost reduce the unit, make it more profitable and ultimately hit an even more attractive price point. We invest heavily on the front end and say, ‘We’ve got to bring this out at a mass market price point that people can reach.’ At $249 with the technology under the hood, we’ve clearly delivered that from day one. It’s only going to get better in terms of the product offering.

Q: Was there a lesson learned from the PlayStation 3, which initially came at a relatively high price?

A: It was $599 when it first came and again that was the same investment. It was a steep hill to climb for both us and the consumer back in 2006, but the dividends are really being paid now. There’s no technology out there that comes close to it and while some of the technology from our competitors is looking long in the tooth, PlayStation 3 is just hitting its stride. If you were one of the first consumers to buy it at $600, six years later you still have a state-of-the-art device. If you got it a little later in the game you’re still getting state-of-the-art technology for $249. We’re always making that investment in the long term as opposed to something that’s going to be a short-term win financially and technologically but that’s going to run out of gas. We look at things in 10-year product life cycles and in order to do that we have to invest in the technology. Unfortunately, the consumer has to make a bit of an investment as well, but that’s what’s really the staying power of the PlayStation brand. People have had really good experiences for multiple years and when they go back and amortize their investment dollars and the amount of entertainment they had, they’re very satisfied consumers and they come back generation after generation.

Q: Is that 10-year life cycle accelerating at all? There seems to be a shift toward digital games.

A: Actually, it’s getting longer. If you look at the distance between the PlayStation 1 and PlayStation 2, it was five years. From 2 to 3 it was six years. We had that 10-year life cycle on PlayStation 1, we’re in the 12th year on 2– we’re still selling it–and as I said, we’re going into the sixth year of PlayStation 3 and we’re just hitting our stride. I really think you’re going to look at a 15-year life cycle on PlayStation 3. So, thanks to technology, the tail seems to be getting longer as opposed to shorter.

Q: What happens when competitive forces come into play? Nintendo will have a new console this year–if it’s a big hit, how will that affect Sony’s plans?

A: I’m obviously prejudiced but you’d be hard pressed to find a technologist who can cite a device existing or coming that is on par with PlayStation 3. I’m not an expert on new machines like the WiiU, but the idea of using a second screen exists today with PlayStation Vita. There are multiple games where the Vita acts as the second screen for a PlayStation 3 game.

Q: What about the competition from smartphones and tablets?

A: The irony is, if you’re a gamer, you’re never going to confuse a smartphone or a tablet with a gaming device. It’s just lacking in interface and technology. The way that you’re used to playing a console doesn’t exist without extended peripherals on a smartphone or a tablet. I think they’re the farm leagues for dedicated gaming systems. They’re doing more to add to the interest in dedicated gaming systems than they are detracting from it. They’re demystifying gaming because they take it down to its simplest form, but ultimately you find yourself wanting more and that’s when you graduate to something like a PlayStation Vita or ultimately to a PlayStation 3.

Q: Do smartphones and tablets eat away at some of the casual gaming audience you could have on the Vita?

A: No, not at all, I think they add to it. We’ve got games at retail from free and 99 cents all the way up to the $59.99 console games. It just continues to add to the number of consumers who consider themselves gamers. We’ve got a billion people worldwide who are gamers today. There’s plenty of other forms of entertainment out there so I thank the smartphone and tablet for really demystifying gaming and bringing more people into our wheelhouse.

Q: One of the criticisms of the Vita, not to mention other Sony products, are all the proprietary measures, such as special memory cards and power cords. Some other companies have moved strongly toward standardized features, so what’s Sony’s thinking behind that?

A: Our devices are very ubiquitous in terms of your ability to use them in conjunction with each other. As far as the proprietary memory is concerned, all memory is not created equal. It’s not relative to a gig versus a gig. We have a high level of storage device that ultimately works best with the Vita. If you compare high-speed memory devices at four gigs for $19.99, we’re actually on the low end in terms of pricing. If you look at basic memory in its cheapest form, if we actually gave that to consumers to use with Vita they’d find it wanting from a performance standpoint. We always say you get what you pay for and believe me, we’re investing in the consumer. We’re not trying to get fat on a proprietary format, we’re trying to give people a proprietary format that works best with the technology we’ve created.

]]>http://www.macleans.ca/authors/peter-nowak/mobile-games-not-a-threat-to-vita-sony-says/feed/0Samsung’s Galaxy Note: between smartphone and iPad?http://www.macleans.ca/authors/peter-nowak/samsungs-note-filling-the-space-between-smartphone-and-ipad/
http://www.macleans.ca/authors/peter-nowak/samsungs-note-filling-the-space-between-smartphone-and-ipad/#commentsFri, 03 Feb 2012 21:45:32 +0000http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=237729It's basically an oversized phone you can scribble on–and it may just take off

]]>Remember when the iPad first came out and Apple touted it as the device that would fill the void between smartphone and laptop? The jokes came along pretty quickly about how long it would be till someone tried to squeeze something more into the space between smartphones and tablets.

Well, laugh no more because Samsung is going there.

The South Korean electronics giant is spending a pile of money on a 90-second commercial during Sunday’s Super Bowl to promote its new Galaxy Note, a weird device that launches in Canada on all three big wireless carriers on Feb. 14.

When I first saw the company show off the Note at its Consumer Electronics Show press conference in early January, I snickered, mostly because the person demonstrating it whipped out a stylus. You know, that obsolete relic of a pre-historic age in which touchscreens were unresponsive and needed plastic pointers to work properly?

Regardless, I sat down for a briefing with Samsung Canada executives this week and they tried to sell me on the thing. Firstly, to my relief, the stylus is intended to be purely complementary. The Note features the same responsive touchscreen as any other Android phones; the plastic pointer is completely optional, although if you’re not going to use it, there really isn’t any sense in getting the Note–any other regular smartphone will do.

Samsung decided to bring back the stylus, the execs told me, because humans still haven’t eliminated the need to write and scribble things. The point was not lost on me as I jotted down what was being said in my (paper) notebook. The Note therefore has a number of features that take advantage of this fact. For one, pressing a button on the stylus and then touching the screen with it results in an instant screen grab, which can then be written on right away. This can be done in any application, whether it’s a website, map or video. The grabs are saved as images, which can then be shared with others in a variety of ways, such as email.

Taking a picture, writing on it and then sending it strikes me as a very economical way to communicate–better than typing in many instances. Here are a few examples (the first is a map, the second a YouTube clip):

The Note has other stylus-enabled apps too, including a basic notepad for writing stuff down. You can also open up documents such as PowerPoint presentations, write on them and save them, then send them off. And finally, Samsung is also opening up the stylus function to outside developers, who will be able to create their own apps either through the Android Market or the company’s own sub-store.

Put all that together and the business applications are clear. The one thought that kept occurring to me during the briefing was that this is exactly the sort of thing Research In Motion needs to be incorporating into its next generation of BlackBerry devices. Like many observers, I’m bracing for the worst when RIM’s new phones arrive later this year–the worst being devices that are just like everyone else’s. Samsung’s stylus idea may be kooky, but it works and it may just take off.

The company is also aiming the Note at artists, where the uses are also clear. Check out the sketch that a professional artist did of me during the briefing. (Trust me, I look more handsome in this picture than in real life.)

There’s one big catch with the Note, though: It’s giant. With a 5.3-inch screen, it’s not much smaller than Samsung’s smallest seven-inch tablet. It’s too big to fit into your front pants pocket and I really don’t like putting it in my back pocket, for fear of it falling out or breaking when I sit down. That means it’s intended for an inside coat pocket or purse, which seems to almost aim it at people who wear suits by default.

In the end, Samsung sold me on the stylus, but I’m not so sure about the size. While I can see the productivity benefits to carrying this thing around, I can also see my friends mocking me when I pull out a ginormous phone to make a call. It would be almost as silly as holding an iPad to my ear.

I do have to hand it to Samsung for experimenting. I’ve been wondering for a while now whether smartphones have peaked and/or stagnated–are we just going to see incremental improvements in processors and screen resolutions from now on? It’s good to see someone is still trying new things, regardless of whether they pan out or not.

]]>http://www.macleans.ca/authors/peter-nowak/samsungs-note-filling-the-space-between-smartphone-and-ipad/feed/15There’s no easy way out for RIMhttp://www.macleans.ca/society/technology/blackberry-must-be-the-safe-phone-again-or-die/
http://www.macleans.ca/society/technology/blackberry-must-be-the-safe-phone-again-or-die/#commentsMon, 23 Jan 2012 18:23:42 +0000http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=235193Without a niche in the marketplace, RIM may be on its last legs

Given that I’ve covered RIM’s weak-kneed responses to snooping and censoring abroad, my knee-jerk asnwer is to suggest that their best bet is to really and truly protect their customers’ data (all customers, not just “enterprise” clients). They should earn again Blackberry’s fading rep as the most security-minded mobile device out there and build a niche as the safest phone you can buy. Would that be enough to reverse their downward spiral? I really don’t know.

Should RIM focus on marketing, as the new chief executive believes? Their messaging could use some work, sure–but it would help if they had some killer products to market, which they don’t.

The truth is that RIM’s problems are the industry’s. There is no big innovation in the works with smartphones. They’ll get faster, they’ll get a bit smaller, and after that it’s all just endless variations on a theme. There are obscene gobs of money yet to be made by selling smartphones, but competing with Apple to create the slickest, priciest handset out there is a sucker’s game. The real money will be made by dozens of also-ran manufacturers out there already flooding Second- and soon Third-World markets with cheap-o smartphones. And these all run Android.

Away from the hype that surrounds some of the hottest Internet companies in Silicon Valley, scores of developers are tackling the lucrative, accelerating sector of technology for children. “Backpacks will slowly shrink… Textbooks will pretty soon be delivered on tablets,” says Warren Buckleitner, editor of Children’s Technology Review, a publication that since 1993 has been tracking new releases and trends in this increasingly busy domain. “It’s not a matter of if, it’s a matter of when.”

The boom in technology designed around children’s needs was catalyzed by the launch of Apple’s iPad in 2010, says Buckleitner, a former teacher with a Ph.D. in educational psychology. The tablet, he says, was the first reasonably priced device to bring together the must-have features of a blockbuster piece of hardware for kids: wireless Internet connection, powerful batteries, an App Store that has galvanized independent developers as well as those working within companies, and a large multi-touch screen.

“We knew that magic happens when you put touchscreens in the hands of children,” says Emil Ovemar, producer and co-founder of Toca Boca (which means ‘touch mouth’ in Spanish), a maker of games for Apple devices within Bonnier, a large Swedish media conglomerate with yearly revenues of almost US$4 billion. The work-and-play philosophy behind Apple devices seems to fit particularly well with the way children operate. “The most natural way to learn something is through play,” notes Ovemar.

Most parents seem to agree. Kids Industries–a marketing agency that targets the family marketplace–found that 77 per cent of 2,200 parents it surveyed in the U.S. and U.K. believe that interacting with a tablet helps their children develop creative thinking and gain problem-solving skills.

The magic, in fact, was already at play–even before the iPad–in touch-screen phones. Another recent study by Kids Industries found that while only nine per cent of pre-school children in different countries can tie their shoes, about 20 per cent can play an app on a smartphone.

No wonder app developers are starting to focus on children. Ovemar and colleagues create games revolving around everyday activities like cutting hair, cooking or serving tea. In their most recent game, named Toca Kitchen, the user can drag a variety of foods from the fridge to the kitchen, cook them and swipe them into the mouth of one of four characters. Toca Boca launched the first of the 10 games now for sale in Apple’s App Store in March 2011. Since then, the apps have been downloaded 4.8 million times–although often for free. They are most popular in Sweden and in anglophone countries (Canada is the company’s fifth biggest market,) but fare well also in the Middle East too.

The children’s app market is so young, few have set out to measure how big it may be, the Financial Times notes. But the study on moms and dads in the U.S. and U.K. by Kids Industries found that parents download around 27 apps a year on average for their children. Pare that with estimates that sales of tablets will skyrocket to over 63 million this year, and it’s easy to see the potential.

Admittedly, the growing jungle of apps poses challenges for parents struggling to discover the best products and keep up with the pace of innovation. But Ovemar predicts it’s schools that will struggle the most along the app-laden learning curve. “I don’t think schools are ready to handle the generation that grows up with touchscreens. There will be a huge mismatch,” he says.

Buckleitner, though, is convinced that pedagogues from past centuries, like Maria Montessori or Friedrich Fröbel (the inventor of the kindergarten), would have embraced the new wealth of hardware and software for children with enthusiasm. “I think Montessori would say to not give a child an iPad is a form of neglect,” he says. “Who doesn’t want a child to learn to read? Well guess what, there’s 50 apps right now that make words into toys, where a child’s finger can drive language.”

From the Maclean’s University Rankings. For more university advice, get your copy today!

Let’s face it: university is expensive. Between tuition, textbooks and having a social life, the cost adds up quickly. Luckily, smartphones can cut costs with a range of apps designed to manage money and track expenses. Forget bank tellers. Since the first mobile banking application became available in Canada in early 2010, the number of Canadians using daily mobile banking has climbed to more than 2.5 million, according to a July report by the Toronto-based Solutions Research Group.

Not surprisingly, the number of apps has also exploded. Here, in no particular order, are the top eight for saving money via your smartphone.

Standing in line at the bank is as exciting as a library tour. Luckily, Canada’s “Big Five”—the Royal Bank of Canada, Toronto Dominion Bank, Bank of Nova Scotia, Bank of Montreal and Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce—all offer a full suite of mobile apps for everyday banking transactions such as checking account balances, paying bills, and transferring money. Plus, you can use your bank’s ATM locator to avoid wallet-gouging fees from machines outside your bank’s network.

2. ATM Hunter

Cost: Free

Available for: iPhone, iPod Touch, Android, BlackBerry

Wallet-gouging ATM fees are unavoidable when it’s an emergency, you’re in a remote location, or you’re just plain lost. But ATM Hunter scouts out the nearest cash point from your bank’s own network, based on your current location. There’s even a map so you can grab cash and find your way home (or back to the bar).

3. Mint

Cost: Free

Available for: iPhone, iPod Touch, Android

To ensure you aren’t broke by Christmas, Mint’s account aggregation lets you track cash flow, bank balances, credit cards and student loans, as well as create a budget and set financial goals. Every transaction is logged and categorized so you see exactly what you’re spending each month and how; categories include spending on groceries, clothing and coffee shops (sorry, there’s no hiding your Starbucks addiction). Mint also alerts you to activity across your accounts, such as when your paycheque clears, when you’re low on cash or credit, or when you overspend in a particular category, so you’ll know exactly when you’re one latte from the brink.

4. BillMinder

Cost: $1.99

Available for: iPhone, iPod Touch, Android

Keeping track of bills can be annoying, but getting your water cut off mid-shower is worse. BillMinder allows you to track recurring bills and enable push notifications to make sure you (or your forgetful roommate) never miss a payment. It also manages bill collector contact information, separates paid and unpaid bills, and calculates the total amount owed for each month so you know how much money to set aside. For peace of mind, you can back up your data and export via email.

5. CheckPlease Lite Tip Calculator

Cost: Free, or $0.99 for the advertisement-free upgrade

Available for: iPhone, iPod Touch, Android

When dining (or drinking) with friends, CheckPlease answers the question that has bedevilled undergrads from time immemorial: “How much do I owe?” Simply input your total bill, the number of people in your party, and the percentage of your tip for fuss-free payment.

6. CardStar

Cost: Free

Available for: iPhone, iPod Touch, Android, BlackBerry

Discount and points cards are the unsung heroes in cash-strapped students’ wallets, but can become increasingly unmanageable (and bulky) as they accumulate. CardStar stores and organizes digital copies for quick retrieval, and also finds nearby stores based on your location. Bonus: it alerts you to coupons.

7. Economy Shopping Lite

Cost: Free, or $1.99 for the upgrade

Available for: iPhone, iPod Touch

This app replaces the diehard pen-and-paper shopping list, filtering items by category for convenience. Forgetful? The app automatically sorts your shopping list by the date of last purchase, so you’ll never accidentally sip sour milk or argue with your roommates over whose turn it is to buy toilet paper. Another feature: you can input price and the location where you purchased the item, so you’ll never forget where to find the cheapest food. Economy Shopping also composes a chart of your monthly grocery bill, so you can see where you could stand to cut back.

8. PayPal Mobile

Cost: Free

Available for: iPhone, iPod Touch, Android, BlackBerry

PayPal, the world’s largest free online payment provider, allows you to transfer funds on the go using three useful mobile features. The Bump feature lets you transfer money between two PayPal accounts by gently bumping two iPhones together. Like CheckPlease, the Split Check feature lets you divide the cost of a meal, including tax and tip, among up to 20 people, and allows for quick reimbursement. The Collect Money feature permits you to request money from multiple people for things like rent and bills.

]]>Samsung Electronics Co. overtook Apple Inc. as the world’s biggest smartphone vendor in the third quarter of this year. The South Korean tech behemoth sold 27.8 million smartphones between July and September, a 44 per cent jump in shipments, whereas Apple’s iPhone sales were at 17.1 million, a 16 per cent drop from the previous quarter. Samsung’s share of the global smartphone market is now at 23.8, compared to Apple’s 14.6 per cent. Analysts largely attributed the upset to Samsung’s decision to turn to Google Inc.’s Android software for its Galaxy smartphones, and consumers’ decision to hold off on new iPhone purchases until the October launch of the iPhone 4S.

]]>http://www.macleans.ca/general/samsung-beats-apple-in-smartphone-sales/feed/4Robot balls: you don’t need them, but you know you want themhttp://www.macleans.ca/society/technology/robot-balls-you-dont-need-them-but-you-know-you-want-them/
http://www.macleans.ca/society/technology/robot-balls-you-dont-need-them-but-you-know-you-want-them/#commentsThu, 27 Oct 2011 18:18:15 +0000http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=217616Meet Sphero, the robot ball you can control with your smartphone

]]>Here is an unnecessary thing for you to covet: Sphero, a robot ball you control with your smartphone, on it’s way this holiday season for $130 US.

What’s it good for? Who cares, it looks fun. You can guide the thing around with your finger, draw a path for it to follow, or use it in a small but growing library of games that blur the line between virtual and physical.

For example, golf. Take a swing with your phone in hand, and Sphero will react as if it had been smacked by an iron club. Orbotix, Sphero’s maker, is encouraging developers to come up with their own applications and games for Sphero, so who knows what the future might bring?

For starters, it’s a great way to mess with kittens and babies. Personally, I’d like to see a swarm of these beat the crap out of a Furby.

]]>http://www.macleans.ca/society/technology/robot-balls-you-dont-need-them-but-you-know-you-want-them/feed/5Has RIM lost its way?http://www.macleans.ca/economy/business/error-message/
http://www.macleans.ca/economy/business/error-message/#commentsThu, 27 Oct 2011 12:10:01 +0000http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/10/27/error-message/A major network outage and investor unrest has Research In Motion vowing that it will fight back

With confidence in the BlackBerry platform waning and calls for a management shake-up growing louder, the last thing Research In Motion Ltd. co-CEOs Mike Lazaridis and Jim Balsillie needed earlier this month was a network meltdown that left subscribers across five continents with spotty access to email for more than three days. It was perhaps a further bit of bad luck that the source of the outage was traced to RIM’s European headquarters in Slough, a dreary suburb of London that also happened to be the setting of the BBC TV series The Office, a sitcom about the pitiable lives of employees of a second-rate paper company toiling beneath a hapless manager played by Ricky Gervais.

Though RIM, based in Waterloo, Ont., is no Wernham Hogg (the name of the fictional paper firm in the TV series), the scramble by Canada’s tech superstar to diagnose, correct and explain the biggest network outage in its history left many observers shaking their heads. The disruptions began on Oct. 10 and immediately impacted users in Europe, the Middle East, Africa and South America. RIM said the following day that the problem had been resolved, only to suffer more disruptions that eventually found their way to North America. The company later revealed that it had suffered a core switch failure in its network operations centre (a sort of central sorting facility for BlackBerry email), and that its backup systems had failed, too.

By the time Lazaridis appeared in a low-tech Web video (standing before a drab beige background) to issue a rare apology on Oct. 13, critics had already characterized RIM’s response to the crisis as inadequate. “The worldwide outages we experienced last week were unfortunate,” Lazaridis told a crowd of developers earlier this week at a BlackBerry conference in San Francisco, where RIM unveiled its new, next-generation BBX mobile platform. He added that RIM is studying what went wrong and is focused on “making this right” with customers.

That will no doubt include RIM’s wireless partners, who deal directly with BlackBerry subscribers. Several are demanding compensation for their customers (RIM has offered US$100 worth of applications that BlackBerry customers normally must pay for), while analysts warn that RIM’s reputation for reliable and secure email services—a big advantage of the BlackBerry platform in an age of slick touchscreen devices like the iPhone—has taken a major hit. “You have to wonder if this will cause some BlackBerry customers to start switching to other phones like Apple’s,” says Ronald Gruia, a telecom analyst at consulting firm Frost Sullivan. “The timing is absolutely awful.”

More ominously, the massive outage, RIM’s fifth disruption in five years, has handed further ammunition to those who argue the company has lost its way. While Balsillie and Lazaridis have called for patience until a new line of BlackBerry “superphones” comes out next year, it’s not just disappointed analysts and bloggers they need to worry about. Angry investors are calling for drastic changes—and some say they’re prepared to force RIM to listen to them.

Bob Walker, the vice-president of Vancouver’s Northwest & Ethical Investments, is one RIM investor who has seen enough. He says the time has come for RIM to do something decisive to restore shareholder confidence following a nearly 55 per cent drop in RIM’s stock price over the past year. “Things have gone south with the technology issues that they’ve experienced recently,” he told Maclean’s. “Clearly, there is a need for the company to demonstrate that it’s taking meaningful action to address both governance and management concerns that have been raised.”

Last June, Northwest & Ethical suggested weakening the grip of Lazaridis and Balsillie on the company through their positions as both co-CEOs and co-chairs of RIM’s board (the two men are also RIM’s two biggest shareholders, controlling a combined 10 per cent of RIM’s outstanding stock). The proposal was to be voted on at RIM’s annual meeting in July, but was withdrawn after RIM agreed to strike a committee of independent directors to study the issue and present its findings by the end of January. Though Walker still wants to see the results of the study—RIM has argued that giving Balsillie and Lazaridis both titles helps it secure business in foreign countries because it’s seen as more prestigious by some governments—he says he would now add his voice to those calling for immediate changes. RIM did not respond to a request seeking comment before Maclean’s went to press.

RIM remains a profitable, growing company and has more than US$1 billion of cash on hand, but its market share has been flagging in recent years. The latest numbers from research firm ComScore Inc. show RIM with just 19.7 per cent of the key U.S. smartphone market in August, down from 24.7 per cent in May. Meanwhile, devices running Google Inc.’s Android software now comprise 43.7 per cent of the market, compared to 38.1 per cent in May, while Apple remained essentially flat at about 27 per cent.

The culprit, for the most part, is a lineup of BlackBerry smartphones that appear increasingly long in the tooth, and delays in getting newer versions to market. While Balsillie and Lazaridis have acknowledged that RIM did not react quickly enough to the iPhone, they stress that the transition to the new BBX platform, based on technology acquired when RIM bought Ottawa’s QNX Software Systems last year, will allow RIM to “leapfrog” the competition when it comes to capabilities. At this week’s developer’s conference, Lazaridis showed off BBX by running a variety of graphics-intense video games and other consumer and business-oriented applications on a PlayBook tablet. They included an eye-catching photo viewer that displayed pictures as prints falling gently on an endlessly scrolling table. “We’re taking the power of QNX, open standards and the best of BlackBerry to build a powerful platform,” Lazaridis told the audience. Barring any hiccups, the new OS is expected to be extended throughout the BlackBerry lineup beginning in 2012. “The RIM transition to QNX will almost need to be flawless,” says Gruia, who added that it may also be time for some new blood in RIM’s senior ranks. “Longer term, they need a fundamental change in vision and strategy to achieve a sustainable competitive advantage.”

Staying focused will be a tough task amid mounting distractions.

In September a small Toronto merchant bank called Jaguar Financial began vocally agitating for sweeping changes at RIM, including a new management team and the sale of part of the company. In an interview with Maclean’s, Vic Alboini, Jaguar’s CEO, claimed he has enlisted support from 12 institutional shareholders that collectively hold an eight per cent stake in RIM, and plans to approach the board this week. Jaguar, which attempts to profit by taking stakes in troubled or undervalued companies and then forcing changes, two years ago helped to throw a wrench in a planned $550-million deal between HudBay Minerals Inc. and Lundin Mining Corp.

Alboini declined to say how big a stake Jaguar had in the BlackBerry-maker or reveal the names of the institutional shareholders he claims to have brought on board. Security regulations require shareholders who acquire or have control over 10 per cent of a company’s shares to disclose their holdings to regulators. (Jaguar has had some recent troubles of its own. Alboini is scheduled to appear before the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada next spring in relation to allegations that he and two others “failed to create and maintain a culture of regulatory compliance and that Alboini demonstrated a disregard for regulatory compliance” at a firm called Northern Securities Inc., where he is also CEO. In a statement on Jaguar’s website, the firm says Alboini plans to “refute the allegations.”)

Despite all the noise, observers say there’s unlikely to be a big shakeup at RIM any time soon. Kevin Restivo, a telecom analyst at IDC Canada, says that despite RIM’s depressed stock price, it’s doubtful the company will become a takeover target until it becomes clear whether the transition to QNX is successful. As for the thorny question of Lazaridis and Balsillie, Restivo argues that they should be given credit for growing RIM’s business across the globe, and that there’s no guarantees that a new management team would fare any better in what’s become an ultra-competitive market in recent years. “In many ways, they are the company,” he says.

]]>http://www.macleans.ca/economy/business/error-message/feed/7Motorola’s path forward looks easier than RIM’shttp://www.macleans.ca/society/technology/motorolas-path-forward-looks-easier-than-rims/
http://www.macleans.ca/society/technology/motorolas-path-forward-looks-easier-than-rims/#commentsTue, 18 Oct 2011 21:58:16 +0000http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=220527It is much easier for consumer-facing companies such as Motorola to delve into the business world than it is to go the other way

As many had speculated, Motorola has indeed dusted off the old Razr name for its new smartphone, unveiled here in New York Tuesday. In the U.S., where the handset maker has licensing rights with the Star Wars folks, the phone actually combines two of Motorola’s most successful brands—it’s called the Droid Razr. For the rest of the world, including Canada, it’s just the Razr.

If you’re into specification porn, Mobile Syrup has you covered. For our purposes here, suffice it to say that the phone is ridiculously light and thin, yet still sturdy, fast and powerful. I played with one briefly and was amazed at how light it felt in my hand. It’s got a steel core and Kevlar on the outside though, so it’s made not to break. Sadly, as a Motorola representative told me, it’s not strong enough to stop bullets (vests apparently have many layers of Kevlar while the phone only has one).

What I found most interesting during Motorola chief executive Sanjay Jha’s presentation was the mention of how the Razr will be aimed at corporate customers as well as the every-day consumer. The device can accommodate secure enterprise email systems and has remote wipe capabilities, which means it’ll probably pass muster with many businesses’ IT departments.

This has bearing on Canada, particularly BlackBerry-maker Research In Motion, which counts business users as its main bread and butter. RIM’s recent woes have been well documented here and elsewhere, but its problem ultimately comes down to this very factor: it is much easier for consumer-facing companies such as Motorola to delve into the business world than it is to go the other way, which is what RIM has been trying and failing to do for some time now.

I asked Jha about this afterward and he agreed to an extent, although he isn’t taking RIM lightly. The BlackBerry maker, which was coincidentally showing off its upcoming BBX operating system at a developer conference in San Francisco, is still a very strong competitor, he said:

There is something at the gut level that resonates with consumers about Android, and we know it because we’ve tried something like three or four OSes. To win in this business, the only learning for me so far is that there is not just one factor that gets you a win. It’s a combination of multiple factors that gets you there. It’s not just cheap, it’s not just the best, you have to hit the appropriate [spots]. They have to do that and it’s work in front of them. Can they do it? Absolutely, it has been done before and it can be done again.

Motorola Canada president Michelle Digulla also acknowledged RIM’s position, but she was a bit more specific in the opportunity for her company:

At the beginning it was the CTOs saying here are the three phones you can pick from or that you can use. That whole dynamic is completely changing. People are like, ‘No, no, no, I’ll pick the phone, you just make it work.’ To be honest, iPhone really pushed the envelope for enterprise people to start doing that. We need to start educating the market about Android for business. It’s an uphill battle, especially in Canada where people are entrenched with RIM, but this is exactly what we need to take hold of.

As I put it on Twitter, Motorola’s hip and cool phones (i.e. the Droid and the original Razr before it) seem to be almost the antithesis of business devices, where staid, sturdy and reliable are the watch words. Motorola could therefore have as much of a tough time getting accepted within companies as RIM is having in the consumer space. The difference, however, is that all the momentum is coming from the much bigger consumer market. It’s obvious which side any handset maker would rather be on.

Motorola will likely benefit greatly in this regard once it is absorbed by Google, a topic that Jha also discussed. More on that in tomorrow’s post.

]]>Having just returned from a trip to New York on Sunday evening, I haven’t had much time to play with the week’s hottest new gadget —the iPhone 4S—but I have been able to formulate some initial impressions, especially in regards to its main new feature: the Siri personal assistant.

First, the basics. Yup, the iPhone 4S works as advertised. It’s faster, slicker and generally better than its predecessor, the iPhone 4. Some nifty additions to the operating system make things easier, like you can fire the thing up initially without having to connect it to your computer and you can share iTunes purchases between devices by turning on the iCloud storage option. Both options do a lot for eliminating cables and computers from the iPhone equation.

I particularly like the camera as well. The iPhone 4 had the best camera on any phone I’d tried so far and the 4S is yet another step up. Apple is continuing to strengthen the case for leaving the full camera behind and simply relying on a phone to take photos, at least in casual situations.

Much of the brouhaha over the new device, however, lies with Siri, the voice-recognition feature that can tell the user about everything from the weather to sports scores to scheduled meetings. In Canada, Siri’s capabilities are somewhat more limited for now—it can’t, for example, give directions because it is not yet programmed with Canadian maps.

I have to admit to being fairly skeptical when Apple CEO Tim Cook unveiled the feature a few weeks ago. It seemed similar to what’s already available on Android phones, which allow voice searches and other functions, while voice recognition in general is a technology that has come a long way but is still plagued by problems.

Siri is, however, remarkably accurate. Despite never having been exposed to my voice before, the tool got all sorts of proper names (mostly) correct, even if it didn’t always know the correct answer. For instance, I asked “What is Neil Gaiman’s best book?” Siri didn’t know and suggested a web search (the right answer, of course, is American Gods), but it did at least identify the author’s name correctly, albeit spelled with a “y” instead of an “i.”

The tool works well with features embedded in the iPhone, such as weather forecasts, calling up contacts, scheduling notifications and launching media. Indeed, after a few hours of playing with it, I may just be ready to say it’s more accurate than anything I’ve seen on Android. And that’s impressive, given how much effort Google has been exerting to gather voice samples.

What really got my attention over the weekend, however, was all the fun and crazy stuff people were trying with Siri, which is now being documented by various websites including “Shit That Siri Says.” Some gems from that site include people asking about—and getting funny answers on—topics ranging from boobs to Spongebob Squarepants.

That got me wondering as to the level of Siri’s artificial intelligence. It’s a loaded term that means different things to different people, so I asked Siri to define it. Here’s what I got back:

Under that definition, which is as good as any, the key to AI is the ability to creatively solve a problem. There’s no denying that Siri’s ability to recognize and translate voice plus grammar into usable data or actions qualifies. In that sense, Siri possesses what seems to be a good level of artificial intelligence.

However, with the sort of stuff showing up on the websites above, a good portion of Siri’s capabilities are likely simple programmed responses. It’s doubtful that even IBM’s Watson supercomputer, which not too long ago whupped human butt on Jeopardy, could construct such creative and funny responses as, “No comment, douche bag” to questions such as “Are you menstruating?”

In such regards, Siri is more of a programmed robot than a thinking entity. Somebody somewhere—or more likely, many people somewhere—have spent a good deal of time anticipating and then programming Siri with potential questions and their respective answers, humourous or otherwise.

None of that is meant to take away from the tool. It’s a cool little bell/whistle to have on a phone and it should be fascinating to see if it raises the stakes in this particular aspect of the smartphone war with Google.

Incidentally, where did Siri come from? The military, of course. As the video here explains, Apple’s tool started as a DARPA project called Cognitive Assistant that Learns and Organizes (CALO). If you’ve read Sex, Bombs and Burgers, that shouldn’t come as a surprise.